Before conducting an archaeological study*** in the District please: 1) Request a Resources Identification from the DC SHPO - there is no other way to obtain previous survey and site files data for the District. 2) Submit a work plan to the DC SHPO Archaeologist for review and approval before starting any survey. 3)GIS cut-and-fill analysis and geoarchaeology consultation may be required for a Phase I/IA archaeological investigation. Geoarch is a minimally-destructive, efficient, and cost-effective way to quickly identify whether buried deposits with archaeological potential are present; GIS is non-destructive. A successful work plan should include both techniques if appropriate. 4)The "Fast-track" process is mentioned on p. 12, and explained in "Phase I Archaeological Survey Outline" in an appendix at the back of this document. 5)Office of the Chief Medical Examiner's procedures & forms concerning the discovery of human remains are also provided in an appendix. 6) Projects that will be curated by the DC SHPO may require completion of a Workplan & Collections Agreement form (example is provided in a appendix at the end of this document). ***In no case should any work proceed without consultation and submission of a work plan for review and approval by the DC SHPO***

GUIDELINES FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The following are REQUIRED for final report submissions to be accepted: 1) Prior to submitting reports and collections please ensure all required elements are included by reviewing the "D.C. HPO Archaeological Compliance Survey Report Checklist" and "DC HPO Archaeological Collections Submission Checklist". Both checklists are provided in this document's appendices. 2) Include a completed site form when appropriate, available as a Word doc and PDF - contact the SHPO archaeologist for a copy. 3) Submit an electronic (PDF) copy of the complete report, including site form(s), NADB form SHPO concurrence letter, and a public project summary suitable for posting on a web site. 4) Signed Collections Transmittal Form, and the Collections Agreement Form (when required). 5) Current collections processing guidance and database requirements will be provided during the consultation process. 6) It is typical for curation facilities to assess fees; please budget accordingly. The DC SHPO does not currently charge a curation fee.

Issued by District of Columbia Office of Planning Historic Preservation Office and District of Columbia Historic Preservation Review Board 1998 – with revisions 2007 and 2018 Prepared by District of Columbia Preservation League In association with: Greenhorne & O'Mara, Inc. Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. Woodward-Clyde Federal Services, Inc. DC Office of Planning GIS standards: ESRI Shapefile (*.shp) format with a spatial reference for Washington, D.C. using the North American Datum (NAD) 1983 State Plane for Maryland FIPS 1900 in 1 meter units with a central meridian of -77, and latitude of origin at 37.6666

GUIDELINES FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Issued by District of Columbia Office of Planning Historic Preservation Office and District of Columbia Historic Preservation Review Board

1998 - with revisions 2007 and 2018

Prepared by District of Columbia Preservation League In association with: Greenhorne & O'Mara, Inc. Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. Woodward-Clyde Federal Services, Inc.

These "Guidelines for Conducting Archaeological Work in the District of Columbia" have been fundedwith the assistance of a matching grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior, National ParkService, through the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Historic PreservationProgram, under provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. Thisprogram receives Federal financial assistance for identification and protection of historic properties.Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; and Section 504, National RehabilitationActo fo 1973, as amended, the U.S. Dept. of Interior (and the District of Columbia), prohibitdiscrimination on the basis of race, color, age, national origin, or handicap in its federally assistedprograms. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program activity, or if you desirefurther information, please write to: Office of Equal Opportunity, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Washington,D.C. 20240

Reproduction and distribution of these Draft Guidelines was made possible through the support ofGreenhorne & O'Mara, Inc., 9001 Edmonston Road, Greenbelt, MD 20770.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Guidelin~ for Archaeological Investigations in the District of Columbia were developedas cooperative effort among the District's archaeological and historic preservation communities.Draft guidelines were the product of a grant from the Historic Preservation Fund Survey andPlanning Grant Assistance Program, which was part of the Department of Consumer andRegulatory Affairs FY1995 (Round IT) Grant-In-Aid program. The helpful assistance of Don.McCleary and Stanley Onye in managing the grant application and implementation process isacknowledged and appreciated. Overall guidance for the development of the guidelines wasprovided by Mr. Stephen 1. Raiche, Chief, Historic Preservation Division and the District ofColumbia Historic Preservation Review Board.

The District of Columbia Preservation League (DCPL) administered this grant under the guidanceof Julie Mueller, Sam Friedman, and Sally Berk. The program's steering committee wascomprised of: Nancy Kassner, Staff Archaeologist, DC Historic Preservation Division; RobertSonderman, Archaeologist on the District of Columbia's Historic Preservation Review Board;Elizabeth Crowell, Senior Archaeologist, Parsons Engineering Science, Inc.; Bernard K. Means,Research Archaeologist, Greenhorne & O'Mara, Inc.; and John H. Sprinkle, Jr., PrincipalHistorian, Woodward-Clyde Federal Services.

A workshop for the development of these guidelines was held on June 5, 1995, in which thepreservation community in Washington, D.C., along with archaeologists located in the Mid­Atlantic Region, were invited. Participants included: Donna Seifert and Charles Cheek, JohnMilner Associates; Michael Petraglia, Petar Glumac, Carter Shields, Parsons EngineeringScience; Richard A. Geidel, KCI Technologies; Pam Cressey, Steve Shephard, Fran Bromberg,Barbara Magid, Alexandria Archaeology; Gary Shaffer, Beth Cole, Maryland Historical Trust;Janet Friedman, Dames and Moore; Ann Palkovich, George Mason University; Paul Inashima,Steve Strach, Marian Creveling, Linda McPeek, National Park Service; Charlie LeeDecker, LouisBerger, Inc.; Janice Artemel, Windwalker Corp; and Louise Akerson, Baltimore Center for UrbanArchaeology. Laura Henley Dean, Meredith Wilson and Tom McCullough, representing theAdvisory Council on Historic Preservation, also participated in the workshops. The hard workand commitment of these participants in drafting the guidelines is gratefully acknowledged.

These guidelines draw heavily on the foundation laid by the Maryland Historical Trust'sGuidelines for Archaeological Investigations in Maryland (Shaffer and Cole 1994). The variedassistance and cooperation of the staff at the Maryland Historical Trust is gratefullyacknowledged.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

CHAPTER

I INTRODUCTION

II IDENTIFICATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 5

III EVALUATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES . 13

IV TREATMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

V CURATION STANDARDS FORARCHAEOLOGICAL COLLECTIONS 29

VI REPORTING STANDARDS FORARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES ..... 42

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A:

APPENDIX B:

APPENDIX C:

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM

SAMPLE MAPSIPROFILES

NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA BASE FORM

These "Guidelines for Conducting Archaeological Work in the District of Columbia" have beenfunded with the assistance of a matching grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior, NationalPark Service, through the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, HistoricPreservation Program, under provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, asamended. This program receives Federal financial assistance for identification and protection ofhistoric properties. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; and Section 504,National Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, the U.S. Dept. of Interior (and the District ofColumbia), prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, age, national origin, or handicapin its federally assisted programs. If you believe you have been discriminated against in anyprogram activity, or if you desire further information, please write to: Office of EqualOpportunity, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240

ii

I. INTRODUCTION

A. PURPOSE OF THE GUIDELINES

Until now there has been no standardization of requirements for archaeological studies conductedin the District of Columbia. With the guidelines that follow, there now can be greaterconsistency in the work that is performed and a uniform set of standards for the quality ofarchaeological work that is conducted in the District. Consequently, there can be consistency inreviewing the archaeological reports resulting from this work. These guidelines are to be usedby professional archaeologists, "both those who previously have worked in D.C. and those whohave not; compliance officers and other decision-makers in Federal Agencies; academicians;researchers and the general public. These guidelines detail the reasons why archaeology shouldbe undertaken and the level of effort required at each phase of work; or during a project. Thegoal of the guidelines is to standardize the level of effort required and to assure the quality ofarchaeological investigations for all archaeologists who conduct work in the District of Columbia.

B. DEVELOPMENT OF THE GUIDELINES

For the past fifteen years, archaeological work in the District of Columbia has increased from afew projects a year to at least 25 - 30 projects a year. In the earlier years it often was assumedthat the District's archaeological resources either were disturbed or destroyed because of the builtenvironment. Over time, as the number of compliance projects increased, however, it becamequite evident that important archaeological resources still do remain in this built environment.Because the intact sites that are available for study are relatively scarce, however, their excavationmust be conducted with a thoughtful and careful approach. These guidelines have beendeveloped to direct archaeological study in the District and meet this goal. This project has beenin the planning stage a long time; each archaeologist who has worked in this office has realizedthe necessity for the guidelines. With only one archaeologist in the Historic Preservation Office,however, it was important that these guidelines be developed with input from other professionalsin the Preservation field. This effort was accomplished through a grant from the National ParkService. Three professional consultant groups responded to a Request for Proposal (RFP) issuedregarding the development of these guidelines. Since each proposal differed in its approach, itwas decided that the ideas from each of the groups would be incorporated into one grant, and thatall three consultants would be participants in this grant, along with the staff archaeologist in theD. C. State Historic Preservation Office, and, the archaeologist on the D. C. Historic PreservationReview Board. The grant then was to have oversight by the D. C. Preservation League, a non­profit historic preservation group in the District. A mailing list of invitees to a workshop ondeveloping D. C. Archaeological Guidelines was created which included the archaeologicalcommunity, architectural historians, historians, architects, the greater preservation community,developers, and members of the public. As expected, the bulk of the respondees were from thearchaeological community, not only from the Washington, D. C. area, but from other Mid­Atlantic states, as well.

1

The workshop, held on June 5, 1996, was a major success. Using the Standards and Guidelinesfor Archaeological Work in Maryland as a template, each workshop leader modified a chapterof the guidelines (i.e., identification, evaluation) as it pertained to the District and with the inputof the workshop attendees, developed this draft of Archaeological Guidelines to be used in theDistrict of Columbia. The next step in this process, before the finalization of the guidelines, willbe the presentation of these Guidelines to the members of the Historic Preservation Review Boardfor their input and any suggestions, additions, corrections, or changes. A large scale mailing ofthis document also will go out to the historic preservation community and the public for itsreview, and comments, if any. After all comments are reviewed· and incorporated, fina.lguidelines will be produced.

C. HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW PROCESS IN THE DISTRICT OFCOLUMBIA.

The District of Columbia has a strong historic preservation law, the Historic Landmark andHistoric District Protection Act of 1978, D. C. Law 2-144. This Historic Protection Act providesfor the official landmark designation of Landmarks and Historic Districts. It also requires thatcertain types of work affecting designated properties be reviewed to ensure that historiccharacteristics are preserved. It does provide for the protection of archaeological resources.iftheyare designated as landmarks.

Under D. C. Law, projects are reviewed initially by Historic Preservation Division (HPD) staffwho make recommendations to the Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB). The HPRB isan eleven-member body appointed by the Mayor, comprised of preservation professionals andprivate citizens. The Review Board, which meets every month, discusses those projects broughtbefore them by the staff. These projects usually consist of alterations/demoJitions/newconstruction/ to historic properties. The HPRB then votes on how the project should proceed,-based on the staff report, presentation made by the applicant, and comments (if any) by opposingand consenting parties. There have been several projects in the downtown historic district inwhich developers have proposed to demolish buildings which contribute to the historic district.As part of the mitigation for the loss of the building (if it is decided that it can be demolished)archaeological investigations have been required. Under these circumstances the developers havehad to use their own funds to finance the excavation. In this case it is not realistic to have thedeveloper go through all three phases of work, so a tight research design is necessary in orderto direct the excavation, and to maximize the retrieval of scientific knowledge.

Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, there has beena considerable amount of archaeological work conducted in the District. Some of the largerSection 106 cases are brought to the Review Board primarily as a courtesy to the Board (forexample, the MCI Arena was reviewed by the Board). The Board may make a recommendationto the State Historic Preservation Officer, but the Board does not have the legal authority to makea decision regarding a 106 case. It is the SHPO that has the final authority in Section 106decisions.

2

D. QUALIFICATIONS OF INVESTIGATORS

Archaeological investigations are routinely complex endeavors that involve a wide range ofprofessional specialists. Job titles include: Project Manager, Principal Investigator, Field Director,Crew Chief, Field Crew, Laboratory Director, and Laboratory Staff, in addition to photographers,draftspersons, computers specialists, editors, and document production staff.

The DC HPD recognizes the qualifications for investigators promulgated by the National ParkService (36 CFR Part 61: Appendix A). Although currently under review by the NPS, theseguidelines specify the education, experience, and skills required by the person who directsarchaeological investigations as well as other studies in historic preservation.

The minimum professional qualifications in archaeology are a graduate degree inarchaeology, anthropology, or closely related field plus:

1. At least one year of full-time professional experience or equivalentspecialized training in archaeological research, administration ormanagement;

2. At least four months of supervised field and analytical experience ingeneral North American archaeology; and,

3. Demonstrated ability to carry research to completion.

In addition to these minimum qualifications, a professional in prehistoricarchaeology shall have at least one year offull-time professional experience at asupervisory level in the study ofarchaeological resources oftheprehistoric periodA professional in historic archaeology shall have at least one year offull-timeprofessional experience at a supervisory level in the study of archaeologicalresources of the historic period (36 CFR Part 61: Appendix A).

Following the theme of these professional qualifications, the DC HPD requires that forinvestigations in the District an archaeologist have at least one year of full-time professionalexperience at a supervisory level in the study of archaeological resources found in urban contexts.The principal archaeologist who meets the qualifications listed above must be designated withinany research designs, work plans, reports, or other documentation associated with an individualundertaking. The HPD retains the right to approve or reject the use of the proposed PrincipalInvestigator or Field Supervisor if those individuals' qualifications are inadequate or notappropriate for the project. In addition, the personnel that have been designated as the PrincipalInvestigator, and Field Supervisor, cannot be substituted without prior discussion with the HistoricPreservation Division.

3

E. PERIODIC REVIEW OF GUIDELINES

One of the important recommendations that developed out of the guidelines conference was therecognition that guidance for archaeological studies should be subject to periodic review forcompleteness and to address any changes made in procedures considered standard practice amonghistoric preservation professionals. To address this concern, the DCSHPO will provide a periodicreview of these guidelines on a two year cycle. The fast review will occur two years from theday the final guidelines are published, if necessary. Individuals or organizations wishing topresent suggested changes to the HPD should present written comments to: District of Columbia,Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Historic Preservation Division, 614 H Street,NW, Room 305, Washington, DC 20001, to the attention of Nancy Kassner, Staff Archaeologist.

4

D. IDENTIFICATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES (PHASE IARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY)

This chapter describes the goals, scope of work, archival and background studies, fieldinvestigations, analyses, and reporting required for completing Phase I archaeological surveys inthe District of Columbia.

A. GOALS

The purpose of the Phase I archaeological survey within the District is to identify the presence.or likelihood, of a project area to contain archaeological resources considered potentially eligiblefor the National Register of Historic Places. Phase I survey should comprise a reasonable andgood faith effort to identify important archaeological resources.

This phase of archaeological investigation assumes that the project sponsor has:1. Determined whether the proposed project is an undertaking that is subject

to consideration under the National Historic Preservation Act or otherapplicable laws and/or regulations;

2. Explicitly defined the project area or area ofpotential effect (APE) oftheproposed undertaking; and,

3. Conducted an assessment of information needs to confirm that furtherconsideration of archaeological resources is warranted.

The project area is defined as the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking maycause changes in the character or use ofhistoric properties, if any such properties exist. Forundertakings requiring review under the National Historic Preservation Act, the project area isequivalent to the Area of Potential Effects (36 CFR Part 800.2(c).

An assessment of information needs includes:1. Identification of previously recorded archaeological sites, historic

structures, or other cultural resources within the project area;2. Identification of previous archaeological, architectural, or historical studies

within the project area;3. Consultation with the DCSHPO regarding the nature of potential impacts

to archaeological resources within the project area; and,4. Recommendation by the DCSHPO regarding the need for and scope of

further archaeological studies.

The product of the identification phase of archaeological research should include:1. A brief sketch of DC history and how the specific history of the project

area fits within that general historical context;

5

2. A summary of the specific land use history for the project area that focuseson the physical integrity of potential archaeological resources and theimpact of previous disturbance to the archaeological record (this includesa discussion of any utilities that have been placed in the area);

3. A summary of cartographic and other documentary information on theproject area; and,

4. An assessment of archaeological sensitivity for the project area.

B. SCOPE OF WORK

Phase I studies should explicitly include consideration of the objectives, methods, and expectedresults.

1. Objectives of the Study

The objective of Phase I archaeological survey is to identify the presence, or likelihood of,archaeological resources within a given project area. Phase 1 surveys may be divided into twostages: reconnaissance and intensive surveys. Focusing primarily on documentary research,reconnaissance level surveys identify the likelihood of a project area to contain archeologicalresources. Intensive level surveys, which include both background research and archaeologicalfieldwork, identify the presence of archaeological resources within a project area. In actualpractice the boundary between reconnaissance and intensive archaeological survey is oftenblurred, given the necessity for flexibility in the design and implementation of archaeologicalstudies in urban environments. In other words, in the urban environment, there are times whensubsurface testing is conducted during the Phase I and there are times when excavation is notconducted during the Phase I. This depends on the particular project, and, the time constraintsinvolved. Often when a Phase I is conducted, the Phase II is conducted immediately thereafteror there is a combined Phase I and II. This occurs because so much earthmoving is required that

. it becomes costly and time consuming to backfill, and then re-open the same areas for a PhaseU. There also have been projects in which the Phase I research consisted only of documentaryassessment completed at a Phase II level.

2. Methods and Techniques

As with any scientific and professional endeavor, archeological survey requires consideration ofmethods and techniques prior to the beginning of fieldwork. This description of methodologyshould present the libraries, archives, and other repositories where background research wasconducted as well as the specific sources consulted. If fieldwork is conducted as part of thePhase I survey, a complete description of the methods and techniques must be presented so thatthe quality and integrity of the findings may be evaluated after fieldwork is completed. For bothdocumentary and field studies it is vital that both negative and positive results be recorded as partof the standard methodology.

6

·3. Expected Results

Every archaeological study builds upon the foundations exposed by previous invest.gations of aregion, area, or city. Part of the scope of work for Phase I survey must include a statement ofexpectations regarding the potential results of the study.

c. ARCHIVAL AND BACKGROUND RESEARCH

Both reconnaissance and intensive Phase I surveys must include archival and backgroundresearch. The purpose of this work is to identify, gather, and analyze information that is readilyavailable regarding the history, development, landuse, and archaeological sensitivity of a projectarea. Archival and background research comprise three principal components: documentaryresearch; informant interviews, and analysis of archaeological collections.

1. Documentary Research

Documentary research is a vital component to all archaeological endeavors. Typical sourcesincluded written documents, such as: wills, deeds, and newspapers; maps and other cartographicsources; and, photographs and other illustrations. The purpose of documentary research is toidentify and characterize the range of potential archaeological resources that may exist within agiven project area. In addition, documentary research generally yields information on the historyof land use within a parcel and how that history may have impacted the site's archaeologicalrecord.

Generally the following types of records are useful in completing documentary research:

District of Columbia Archaeological Site Inventory;Archaeological Reports from sites excavated near the project area;Contractor's or developer's maps and planning documents;Historic maps and atlases, including U.S. Coastal Survey maps from the late 19th

century;National Archaeological Database (NADB);National Register of Historic Places Information System (NRIS);Insurance records and maps, e.g. SanbomlBaist Company maps;Publications on local prehistory and history;Environmental data sources, e.g. Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerlySoil Conservation Service) maps;Environmental Impact Statements and Environmental Assessments;Masterplans or other facility operation documents;Building and/or demolition permits;Taxation maps;

7

Reports to the Commissioners records;Street directories; and,Public utility records.

Additional records that are found will, of course, be acceptable.

2. Informant Interviews

Many individuals retain important knowledge regarding the history of Washington, especiallyon recent developments within individual lots and parcels. Local neighborhood and preservationorganizations should be contacted for information on individuals knowledgeable about sectionsof the District. In addition, personnel from various city agencies, government organizations, Of

long-time city businesses may have information about the history of individual parcels. Informantinterviews may be combined with preliminary field inspections of a project area.

3. Archaeological Collections

Although the District has yielded significant archaeological collections through excavationsconducted during the late 19th century and throughout the 20th century, there is no one singlerepository for archaeological materials and their associated site records. At present the DC SHPOdoes not maintain a curation facility for artifact assemblages. Artifacts and field records may befound at the Smithsonian Institution, and at various colleges and institutions. In addition, severalconsulting archaeological firms retain collections resulting from excavations within the city.

Where appropriate, these wide ranging collections should be reviewed in order to provide acontext for potential archaeological sites. Often analysis of previously-excavated collections iswarranted prior to the continuation of archaeological work within one property or project area.For example, before completing Phase ill excavation in 1995 at a site associated with"development of Metro's Green Line, the artifacts and field notes from an early 1980s excavationwere analyzed (Louis Berger & Associates, Inc. 1993). This work allowed the archaeologists torefine the research questions applied to the individual site during subsequent data recoveryexcavations (Louis Berger & Associates, Inc. 1994).

4. Sources of Information

Until the establishment of the Federal city at the end of the eighteenth century, much of theDistrict was part of Maryland, thus some background research may be required at the MarylandState Archives in Annapolis. For most projects, there are five principal repositories fordocumentary and archival information on the District:

8

Martin Luther King Memorial Library9th & G Streets, NWWashmgtoniana Room, 3rd Floor(202) 727-1111

M-F: 9:00-9:00Sat: 9:00-5 :30

National ArchivesPennsylvania Avenue At 8th Street, NWMicrofilms, Room 400(202) 501-5400

M-F: 9:00-9:45Sat: 9:00-5 :00

Library of Congress, Madison BuildingFirst & East Capitol Streets, SEPrints & Photographs, Room 337(202) 707-6394

M-F: 8:30-5:00Geography & Map Division, Room BO1(202) 707-5522

M-F: 8:30-5:00Sat: 8:30-12:00

Historical Society of Washington, D.C.1307 New Hampshire Avenue, NW(202) 785-2068

wes., Fri, & Sat: 10:00-4:00TOOrs: 12:00-4:00 (members only)

D.C. Archives, Office of Public RecordsNaylor Court, between 9th, 10th, N & 0 Streets, NW(202) 727-2052

M-F: 7:30-4:00 (call for appointment)

In addition, due to the large federal land ownership in the District, it is important to contact theapplicable federal (e.g., General Services Administration, Department of the Interior, Departmentof Defense, or Department of Housing and Urban Development); or other agency (WashingtonMetropolitan Area Transit Authority) for information derived from previously sponsored historicpreservation projects. Often these agencies have conducted preliminaiy studies in association withthe National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)such as Environmental Assessments (EA) or Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) which maycontain important information on historic development or landuse. EAs and EISs are notnecessarily housed with the Historic Preservation Division.

9

The DCSHPO is the most important repository for information about the archaeological recordof the District. The DCSHPO maintain records on National Historic Landmarks (NHL); NationalRegister of Historic Places (NRHP) districts and individual properties; as well as a city-wideinventory of archaeological sites and structures. As of 1996, there are approximately 200recorded archaeological sites within the District. Archaeological site forms for these propertiesare retained by the DC SHPO. Access to the information contained on these forms is restrictedto professional archaeologists and other researchers with legitimate research interests in thelocation of archaeological sites across the city. In addition, the SHPO maintains records onapproximately 21,000 standing structures, objects, and other buildings. These records presentlyare being entered into the National Park Service's Integrated Preservation Software (IPS) programfor database management.

D. FIELD INVESTIGATIONS

The District of Columbia is composed primarily of urban land, with relatively small open areasof undeveloped parcels. Covered with buildings, structures, roadways, and parking lots, urbanareas require distinctive technical approaches to archaeological studies, such that, urbanarchaeology is a recognized subdiscipline in the field of historical archaeology. In addition,because of the additive nature ofurban construction, where large scale topographic transformationof individual parcels is possible and common, the potential for deeply buried archaeological sitesand features often must be considered in cities. Traditional Phase I survey methods, such as thehand-excavation of shovel test pits or conducting surface collection of artifacts, are generallyimpractical in urban settings.

Urban environments present unique challenges to archaeologists, especially in the area of workerhealth and safety. In addition to complex stratigraphic contexts, the likelihood of deeply burieddeposits means that excavation methodologies also must take into account applicable OccupationalSafety and Health Agency (OSHA) regulations and guidelines for work in trenches, deepexcavations, or confined spaces. Moreover, urban environments have the potential to containparcels contaminated With hazardous materials. The presence of hazardous materials may be dealtwith by employing the appropriate level of protection needed.

Given the difficulties of traditional excavation techniques within urban environments, Phase Istudies within the District often comprise only reconnaissance level investigations, withbackground and archival work completed in conjunction with limited field investigations.

On developed parcels (e.g. those where machine-assisted excavation would be necessary) thePhase I field investigation should include:

1. Pedestrian reconnaissance of the entire project area;2. Sketch of parcel, land use features, surface indications of cultural

remains, etc.;3. Mechanical excavation or test boring for geophysical and hazardous

materials analysis; (this is not usually conducted by thearchaeological consultant, but can be informative if it is obtained);

10

4. If warranted, machine-assisted excavation of trenches.

In areas that contain undeveloped parcels (e.g. where machine assisted excavation is not required)Phase I archaeological fieldwork should include the hand-excavation of shovel test pits, test units,or other excavation units designed to identify the presence or absence of below ground culturalremains. The distribution and interval of test pits may be left to the professional judgment of theproject's Principal Investigator.

E. ANALYSES

After background studies, archival research, and, if warranted, archaeological fieldwork iscompleted, the Phase I archaeological survey must analyze the data gathered. Analysis shouldfocus on four components: a summary of archival and background research; a description ofalterations over time to the urban landscape within the project area; a description of results of anyfield investigations conducted; and, an assessment of archaeological sensitivity. Archaeologicalsensitivity of a particular project area means the likelihood of the area, or portions of the area.to contain archaeological sites, features, or artifacts that may be reasonably considered importantin understanding the history of the District. For archaeological projects sponsored in compliancewith federal legislation, the threshold for significant archaeological sites is whether the propertycan be considered, after Phase I work, potentially eligible for listing on the National Register ofHistoric Places.

F. REPORTING

Phase I archaeological surveys must follow the reporting requirements outlined in Chapter V.Generally, the requirements call for the production of a professional report that summarizes thegoals, methods, and results of each Phase I investigation.

G. ·ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORMS

An archaeological site is the location of human activity in the past for which a boundary may bedefined. Given the predominantly urban landscape of the District, the DC SHPO recommendsdefining archaeological sites as comprising the area encompassed by individual projects. Thus,a proposed project that involves an entire city block would receive one site number and a limitedexcavation on one lot within a city block would each be designated as an individual site.Completing the archaeological site form is required for all resources identified as a result ofPhase I archaeological survey within the District.

The DC Archaeological Site Form is presented in Appendix A. In 1996, the DC SHPO adoptedthe Integrated Preservation Software (IPS) system for data management of its cultural resourcesdata base. Beginning on June 30, 1997 all archaeological sites forms (either new or revised) mustbe entered into the DC SHPO IPS database.

11

Additional Considerations:

Occasionally projects in the District are on a "fast track", and must be completed within acompressed schedule.. Under these circumstances, in order to maximize field time, Phase I andPhase n work is collapsed. That is, the historic work and Phase I testing is conducted as usual.However, if any intact resources are found and they are potentially eligible for the NationalRegister, then Phase n fieldwork is conducted immediately on these resources. This eliminatesthe process of backfilling the trenches, writing a separate Phase I report, then returning to thefield again to open the same trenches in order to conduct the Phase n work. When the Phase Istudy is complete the Principal Investigator for the project should meet with the DCHPDarchaeologist and any appropriate Agency representatives to review Phase I findings and discussthe Phase n. At the completion of the Phase n work under these circumstances, a combinedPhase I and Phase IT report will be written.

12

· ill. EVALVATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES (pHASE n TESTING)

A. OVERVIEW

The purpose of the Phase Il testing program is to evaluate the significance of archaeological sitesthreatened by project impacts. Significance is defined as the eligibility of an archaeological sitefor listing in the National Register of Historic Places.

The following criteria are used in evaluating properties for nomination to the National Register;this evaluation of eligibility will be conducted for all properties effected by Federal Agencyundertakings.

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture ispresent in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of state and local importancethat possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, andassociation and

(a). that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to thebroad patterns of our history; or

(b). that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or

(c). that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method ofconstruction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artisticvalues, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose componentsmay lack individual distinction; or

(d). that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistoryor history.

D.C. Landmarks

In order to evaluate significance, the Phase II investigation will involve a more intensive studyof individual sites within the project impact area through techniques designed to revealinformation on historic context, integrity, horizontal and vertical boundaries, and type and levelof significance.

If sites meet the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, theFederal agency will assess whether the project will have an effect on the site, and whether thateffect will be adverse (36 CFR 800.9). This assessment is made in writing to the State HistoricPreservation Officer who will or will not concur with the determination of effect. If there isagreement as to the eligibility of the resource between the SHPO and the Federal agency, thena plan for the consideration of the resource will be developed. Adverse effects to archaeologicalsites may be mitigated through avoidance; excavation; or, occasionally, other methods.

If a resource is not considered eligible then no further field investigations would be necessary.

13

B. TASKS

1. Scope. of Work and Research Design

For prehistoric, historic, or submerged sites, Phase IT testing should be sufficient to evaluate sitesignificance, including integrity, site boundaries and cultural affiliation. Specific methods andtechniques will be developed on the basis of site conditions, the results of previous Phase Isurvey, and the background research. All Scopes of Work should be developed in consultationwith the District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Office. Research questions appropriateto the endeavor will be developed in consultation with the D. C. SHPO and will be used to guidearchaeological excavation. In the preparation of the scope of work, the .placement of 20 percentof the trenches, units, and/or shovel tests should be left to the discretion of the PrincipalInvestigator, dependent upon field conditions. The placement of the remainingtrenches/units/shovel tests should be based upon where they will best address the researchquestions. Despite the anticipated variability of field methods, certain goals will be common toall Phase IT investigations (see NPS 1982):

1. To define the category of the archaeological resource, usually as a site or as adistrict;

2. To establish horizontal and vertical site boundaries;

3. To determine if the archaeological resource has integrity. Archaeologicalinformation important in determining integrity includes internal site stratigraphy,natural and man-made post-depositional disturbances, site formation processes, thepresence and nature of features, and the presence and preservation of artifactualand organic remains in their original context.

4. To establish the historic context for evaluating the archaeological resource.Archaeological information that may establish context includes:

a. period(s) of occupation- Phase IT investigations should date the site,through (1) the recovery of a sufficient number of chronologicallydiagnostic artifacts to date the site or its components, (2) therecovery of datable carbon samples or other chronometric samples,or (3) the recording of geomorphological data that may provideapproximate chronological limits to the occupation of the site.

b. functional type- Phase IT investigations should identify site functionby determining the presence and nature of features, the intrasitepatterning of artifacts, site size (through boundary definition), anduse of other analytical methods;

5. To identify the type of significance (criteria [a] through [d]), at a local, regional, ornational level.

Site-specific research questions should be developed to direct the research and fieldwork at thesite. The research questions should be such, that, in answering them, the National Register

14

eligibility of the site can be addressed. The research design should present proposed researchquestions and anticipated property types which may be present at the site.

Suggested Phase IT research questions may include:

What is the sequence of the land use history of this property? How is that manifested inthe archaeological record? What documentary sources are available to answer thisquestion?

What has been disturbed? Is the disturbance localized?

What topographic changes have occurred on the property? (Compare them over time)

What is the occupation history of the property? What ethnic groups, socioeconomicgroups, and/or occupational groups are represented by the inhabitants of the property?

What property types might be anticipated in the project area? How are they representedelsewhere in the District or region in terms of their frequency or infrequency?

Are potential buried environmental landforms present on the site?

Other research questions, directed specifically at the land use which occurred on the propertyshould be developed, as well.

The research design also should address the applicability of the work to regional researchquestions, not just site specific ones. It also should be directed toward answering questions 'ofa much broader nature, reflecting what "social events" were occurring at the time the site wasoccupied (and for which it is significant) (For example, in the early 19th century the IndustrialRevolution changed the entire dynamics of the family; the class system; and women's roles.These are broader social issues that may be related to a site, or may provide the context for thesite.)

Upon completion of the Scope of Work and Research Design, the resulting documents should besubmitted to the DCSHPO for review and approval. Any DCSHPO comments should beincorporated into the final Scope of Work and Research Design which will direct the project.

If the Scope of Work or Research Design is more than 2 years old, it will need to be reevaluatedby the DCSHPO, even if it already has reviewed and approved the Scope of Work and/orResearch Design previously.

15

2. Background Research

For prehistoric, historic, or submerged sites, supplemental) documentary research beyond thatconducted at the Phase I level is necessary to develop research questions and to develop thehistoric context for the evaluation of archaeological resources. This allows a more comprehensiveunderstanding of the significance of the resources and, accordingly, of their potential eligibilityfor inclusion in the National Register. This phase of documentary research is necessarily moreintensive and specific than that conducted at the Phase I level and should address the followingconsiderations:

1. A more in-depth understanding of the character of the project or area of potentialeffects (APE) including occupation, land-use, and development;

2. A more in-depth review of the previous archaeological work conducted at the siteand a synthesis of work on related site types in the region;

3. Site-specific documentary data on historic sites to be examined by archaeologicalfield testing are particularly important in this phase. This is necessary so that theempirical data derived from the archaeological testing can be interpreted morefully within an historic context;

4. For historic sites, documentation of significant persons, events, or sites associatedwith or in the project area or area of potential effects (APE) shall be undertakento determine the applicability of National Register criteria other than (d).

It should be noted that all the Phase II documentary research outlined above should be conductedprior to any field testing; however, this may not always be possible. In such cases on historicsites, sufficient documentary research shall be conducted prior to the field testing, including a titlesearch to establish the history of property ownership, and research into other property-specificsources, such as diaries, tax maps, etc; so that basic decisions may be made as to field strategyand appropriate techniques. Additional research may be required after the completion offieldwork, specific to features discovered as part of the study.

The minimum level of documentary research for a Phase II archaeological investigation on anhistoric site also includes examination of the following types of information:

1. Environmental data; topographic information available from current and historicaltopographic maps; and previous archaeological investigations shall be reviewed.

2. Primary sources shall be examined and assessed for the project relevantinformation they contain. Typical classes of documents that should be consultedinclude deeds, tax assessments, insurance surveys, census data, road dockets, citydirectories, maps, atlases, city plats, building permits, lithographs, photographs,and other public and private records, such as family papers, travel accounts,diaries, and other documents, as may be appropriate for achieving the goals of thePhase II investigation.

16

3. Secondary sources which pertain to the historical, cultural, or processual contextsof identified sites or properties shall be consulted in order to address more fullyissues of site significance and National Register eligibility. Seconda' y sources tobe reviewed should include architectural surveys, National Register forms, andHABSIHAER documentation, as well as secondary histories.

4. Where appropriate, oral history interviews would assist in the evaluation of theNational Register significance of the site. The decision to use oral historyinterviews as part of a project should be decided in coordination with the DCHPD·archaeologist.

The goal of background research is to collect enough information to develop an historic contextwhich presents a complete land use history.

3. Fieldwork

Terrestrial Site Evaluation. The Consultant shall determine the horizontal limits of the site bymeans of systematic shovel test excavation, or the use of systematically spaced backhoe trenchesdependent on site conditions. All units of measurement on the site shall be done using feet andtenths of feet. The testing methodology utilized will be determined on the basis of siteconditions.

The interval between shovel test pits (STP), when utilized, shall be determined on a project byproject basis. The diameter of the STPs will measure 15" in diameter. All shovel tests shall beexcavated in natural levels, into Pleistocene-aged deposits. The integrity of archaeologicaldeposits, their vertical extent and stratigraphy, and the cultural/temporal affiliation of componentsshall be examined through the excavation of additional test units not less than 3 x 3 feet in size.

In areas where archaeological resources may be buried beneath urban fill, a series of backhoetrenches should be excavated across the site to remove the overburden which overlays thesearchaeological deposits. The number of backhoe trenches excavated should be sufficient to

. determine" the boundaries of the archaeological resources. Upon encountering intactarchaeological deposits, excavation should proceed using shovels and trowels. A number of 3x 3 foot square test units, to be determined in consultation with the DCHPD archaeologist, shouldbe excavated in each trench to determine site integrity.

All soil from shovel tests and test units shall be screened though 1/4" mesh (or finer) hardwarecloth. Soil shall be described using Munsell soil colors and USDA designations for soil texture.Care shall be taken to preserve relevant data from in situ deposits, e.g. soil samples, flotationsamples, carbon samples.

All trenches, units, shovel tests and features shall be fully documented. Units and features willbe drawn and photographed in profile and plan view. Trenches and shovel tests will be drawnand photographed in profile. Photographs will include both black and white print film and colorslides. In addition to photographs of record, context shots will be taken showing general siteconditions and archaeologists at work. The location of all trenches, units, shovel tests, andfeatures will be mapped to scale on a site map.

17

If suitable mapping is not available, topographic mapping of the site area shall be completedusing a contour interval of 5 ft. or .less. All trenches, unit locations, shovel tests, features, andall relevant cultural and natural features shall be shown on a site map.

The grid established for these investigations shall be tied into a permanent landmark, and apermanent datum shall be established in a permanently stable area, if possible.

Where appropriate, special analyses, such as radiocarbon dating, geomorphological analysis, floraland faunal analyses, cross mending or refitting, and other special studies shall be carried out todetermine site chronology, function, and environment. Where complex architectural features arepresent, the use of an historical architect may be required to assist in the interpretation of thestructure.

SubmergedSite Evaluation. Potentially significant magnetic and/or acoustic anomalies discoveredduring the Phase I submerged survey shall be tested by excavation under the direct supervisionof a Principal Investigator specializing in submerged sites in order to determine the cause of theanomalies. Inspection by divers, coring or other appropriate means shall be used to test thenature of the suspected prehistoric or historic sites. In the case of magnetic anomalies, sedimentshould, in many cases, be removed to allow identification, approximate dating and determinationof importance of objects and sites found.

In conducting a Phase II evaluation of a submerged resource, the Consultant shall:

1. Perform the submerged test excavations by locating and making hands-on divingexaminations of anomalies or features. The presence of all submerged and buriedtargets, shipwrecks, objects, and features shall be ascertained;

2. Provide a seaworthy survey vessel, crew and fuel sufficient to perform the workadequately. and expeditiously. The contractor shall provide shore basetransponders and on board positioning equipment, using a Motorola Mini-RangerIII or an equivalent for positioning requirements;

3. Use survey techniques, methodologies and equipment that conform with the stateof the art of current professional knowledge and development.

4. National Register Evaluation

Site boundaries shall be mapped on project drawings in sufficiently small scale to indicated thedetails of the archaeological investigation.

The Federal Agency shall assess the significance of the site, stating the criteria of significance(under Criteria [a], [b], [c], and/or [dD, and the level of significance. A statement of significanceshould be prepared which evaluates the site in reference to the DC Historic Contexts and thehistoric context which has been developed for the site. Justification for significance shall include:

18

criteria for significance and level of significance; site integrity; site boundaries; and historiccontext. In the evaluation of the site, it is necessary to explain what makes the site significant.This would include, but not be limited to, research potential and value, the rarity of the site type,the public value, and the potential impact to archaeological resources. If a site is significantunder criterion (d), the Consultant shall address how important information is contained therein;the specific research questions that could be addressed; and how important information derivedfrom this site relates to information gained from similar sites excavated within the region.

The Federal Agency shall assess the impact of proposed construction on a significant site. Theundertaking (project) should be assessed as having "no effect", "no adverse effect" or an "adverseeffect" on intact archaeological resources. If an undertaking has an adverse effect onarchaeological resources, a Memorandum of Agreement will be developed between the Agency.SHPO and other participating parties, in which a plan to mitigate adverse effects will be set out.Methods for mitigation may include data recovery through site excavation or avoidance, or somecombination thereof.

If data recovery is part of a plan to mitigate adverse effects, a scope of work and schedule shallbe prepared. This proposal should identify research questions that will yield importantinformation derived from study of the site, when Criterion (d) applies. The research design andmethodology in the scope of work shall guide field work and analysis to specifically answer theseresearch questions. This scope should be reviewed by the DC HPD archaeologist prior to theinitiation of Phase III fieldwork.

19

IV. TREATMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES (pHASE m DATARECOVERY INVESTIGATIONS)

A. GOALS

The purpose of treatment for compliance projects is to avoid, minimize or mitigate the adverseeffect of an undertaking on an archaeological property listed in or determined eligible forinclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.

There are various treatment measures: preservation in place includingavoidance/covenant/easements; recovery of important data; in-place protection (long-termplanning); destruction of site without recovery (acceptance of loss); nomination of the site to theNR; development of a historic preservation plan; or implementing an archaeological resourcetraining or interpretation program (alternatives to mitigation or in addition to mitigation).

B. PROCESS

When there is an adverse effect to an archaeological property, there is negotiation among theparticipating parties regarding the treatment of that property. The participating parties are usuallythe State Historic Preservation Officer, the Federal Agency, and the Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation. During consultation, interested persons are afforded an opportunity to providecomment to and consult with the federal agency and SHPO on the potential effects of theundertaking and possible ways to avoid or mitigate effects. As a result of this consultationprocess, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is developed regarding the treatment of theresource. The MOA specifies how the undertaking will be carried out in order to avoid ormitigate adverse effects, or documents acceptance of such effects. MOAs are legally bindingdocuments, therefore they should be written with care (See Advisory Council's "PreparingAgreement Documents" 1989).

The Memorandum 'of Agreement should contain some of the following information:Who the lead agency is for the project;Project meetings/reporting dates;Amendments to account for changes in the project;An end date which is project specific;Some of the stipulations should have an end date; i.e. if there is going to be publicinterpretation it should be developed within one year (or a stated time period) ofcompletion of project.

Treatment approaches are decided on a case by case basis. Each project has its owncharacteristics and needs as do the historic properties involved. Early evaluation of effects isessential for consideration of all treatment measures prior to construction. A project should bereviewed early for its effects on all historic properties, architectural and archaeological. Reviewof the design should be at the beginning of the project, during the project and at the end of theproject to ensure that there have not been any changes regarding areas of impact. All areas that

20

may be potentially affected, including staging areas, should be noted, so that all areas to beimpacted will be assessed. Often there is no understanding of what causes impact toarchaeological properties; (i.e. the movement of heavy equ.pment over an area which has beenidentified as having archaeological resources); thus areas that may be adversely affected are notincluded as part of the area of potential effect.

C. SOURCES OF TECHNICAL INFORMATION

There are a number of technical bulletins published by the Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation, the National Park Service and other Federal Agencies which are helpful inexplaining the Section 106 process and various treatment options:

Treatment of Archeological Properties (ACHP 1980);Preparing Agreement Documents (ACHP 1989);Consulting About Archeology Under Section 106 (ACHP 1990)~

The Section 110 Guidelines (ACHP and NPS 1989);Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Architectural and EngineeringDocumentation (Dickenson 1983; 44730-34);Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archeological Documentation(Dickenson 1983; 44734-37);Secretary of Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation Projects (Dickenson 1983~

44747-42);The Archeological Sites Protection and Preservation Notebook (U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers 1992, Vicksburg District); and,36CFR79 Curation Standards.

D.· PRESERVATION IN PLACE

Ideally, the best treatment option for archaeological resources is preservation in place. However,in the District of Columbia, where open space is limited, and development is important foreconomic reasons, preservation in place may be considered but is rarely practiced. Preservationcan be achieved in several ways: by avoidance, protection, and acquisition of protectiveeasements.

1. Avoidance

This is the most preferable treatment option. It may be possible to reroute a road corridor toavoid a site; or to redesign the placement of a building in order to avoid archaeological resources.In the urban environment, however, it often is impossible to redesign a building to avoid a sitesince space is scarce and valuable. Thus, other treatment options must be considered in thesecircumstances.

21

Avoidance is not considered protection of a site. If there will be future construction on theproperty that has been avoided, a long-range plan should be developed to protect or determinehow to deal with the site in the future.

2. Burying of site

In some cases an archaeological site may be saved from adverse effect by burying it under filtercloth and clean fill. This only is practiced when there will be no deep impacts to a site.Consultation with the DCHPD should take place to determine the acceptable methods for buryingthe site.

3. Protection

This consists of the shielding of the resource from damage inflicted through natural and humanforces. During project construction measures to protect a site can include: fencing (must be veryobvious) around the site; routing of construction activities and staging areas to prevent inadvertentdisturbance; explicit resource protection measures in contractor specifications; vegetative plantingto screen soil exposure, signage, site stabilization; law enforcement patrols to deter vandalism,and, in some circumstances site visits to see that a site is being avoided by construction crews.The Agency's Historic Preservation Plan should incorporate demolition by neglect (adverse effect)language.

4. Acquisition of Protective Easements/Covenants

Easements and/or Covenants are legal tools to ensure the property's preservation in perpetuity.An easement is a legal instrument designed to protect and preserve a historic property inperpetuity without conveying or transferring ownership of the property. Easements offer thestrongest protection for archaeological sites and should be reviewed again after a certain timeperiod.

E. ACCEPTANCE OF LOSS

In some instances preservation in place or recovery may not constitute viable treatment optionsfor a given undertaking or archaeological property.

Life threatening or serious health and safety issues can supersede a project's preservation values.When hazardous waste is an issue, assessment should be made of the cost for excavation of thesite, the amount of contamination on the site and the significance of the site. Then, the publicbenefits versus value of archaeological resource should be weighed. It should be emphasized thatthe presence of hazardous waste on a site does not automatically preclude archaeologicalexcavation. If there is a question in this regard, the advice of outside experts should be sought.

22

If testing demonstrates that a significant archaeological property does not have additional datawhich may be used to address valuable research questions, then recovery is not an appropriatetreatment option or justifiable expense.

If acceptance of loss is the selected option, the parties should consider implementing alternativetreatment measures to mitigate the destruction of the resource. These can take the form of adetailed archival and documentary study of the property.

If a site is considered to contain hazardous waste and archaeological excavation is not feasible.an example of a mitigation measure for this site could be the writing of a book, and/or thedevelopment of a video of a quality that could be aired on PBS, based on the findings of theresearch.

F. DATA RECOVERY

As a result of adverse effects to archaeological properties usually the mitigation treatment is torecover the property's valuable information. The purpose of data recovery is to retrieve andanalyze information from an archaeological property necessary to address important researchquestions which have been developed as part of the research design for the site. Recovery isaccomplished through detailed archaeological excavation, recordation, background research,analyses, and reporting, performed in accordance with a well defined and justified data recoveryplan.

Data recovery involves a substantial commitment of time and funds, and should be based firmlyon sound background data, planning and a valid research design. Data recovery must be precededby appropriate background research, identification and evaluation (the initial stages of this shouldhave been done during Phase I and Phase II investigations), in order to understand the property'ssignificant characteristics and data expectations. Efficient and cost effective measures should beemployed to maximize retrieval of the data necessary to achieve the desired goals, yet minimizecosts. The consulting parties determine the extent of recovery efforts on a case-by-case basis.Data recovery must be conducted in accordance with a comprehensive research design/datarecovery plan, reviewed by the Historic Preservation Division, Advisory Council, and otherinvolved parties, as appropriate. Completion of an approved data recovery plan generally fulfillsan agency's compliance responsibilities for an undertaking, unless unexpected discoveries occurduring construction.

1. Research Design/Data Recovery Plan (Critical)

All data recovery efforts must be guided by an explicit and thorough research design /datarecovery plan.

Careful development of the Phase III research design is critical for the retrieval of significantinformation--the main goal of this phase of research. The HPD and Advisory Council (forSection 106 projects) review substantive contents of the plan to ensure that the proposed research

23

questions are viable and answerable based on the site's data expectations, the methodology isappropriate, and the amount and areas proposed for investigation are reasonable for the givenarchaeological property 'and undertaking.

The objectives of Phase ill archaeological investigations must include:

1. Description of the archaeological property under study and the characteristicswhich make it eligible for the National Register;

2. Maximum retrieval of important data relevant to the defined research questionsfrom the archaeological property;

3. Determining the property's characteristics and variability, including inter- andintra-site patterning; and

4. Public education/interpretation of the data recovery results.

The Methods and Techniques section of the plan should justify the research strategies plannedto retrieve the maximum amount of data necessary to meet the study objectives. Discussionshould address methods to be used in background research, fieldwork, analyses, data managementand dissemination of results. Method and Techniques should include a schedule and ajustification of the proposed treatment and disposition of the recovered materials and records.(It should be noted here that the District at this time (1997) does not have a qualifiedrepository for the storage of artifacts. Under these circumstances, contractors should beprepared to house the collections until a repository is established, or the Agency shouldinvestigate 'the possibility of storing the artifacts). Finally, it should discuss the proposedmethods for informing the interested public about the project, making the results of the researchavailable to the public, and involving the interested public in the data recovery, if feasible.

Expected Results should rely heavily upon previous research reports (Phase I and IIinvestigations) and other readily available documents, in order to discuss the quantity, age,condition, and other general characteristics of the archaeological materials and features anticipatedin the study. The anticipated results must be applicable to the proposed research questions andhypotheses.

In addition to the above elements, the plan also should discuss provisions for regular statusreports, meetings and site visits.

2. Archival and Background Research

For Phase III investigations, the main purpose of archival and background research is to augmentinformation on a previously identified archaeological property in order to address the desiredresearch questions/hypotheses. Research should focus on summarizing previous work on theresource, analyzing existing collections from the property, refining the research questions andclarifying the methodologies necessary to address those research issues.

24

· 3. Field Studies

In order to achieve the goal of max.mum data retrieval, Phase III fieldwork strategies generallyemploy excavation of a portion or a sample of the archaeological property. Total excavation ofthe property is not recommended or required, except under extraordinary circumstances. Theamount of work to be done will be determined on a case-by-case basis, based upon the nature ofthe archaeological property, the research questions, and the undertaking itself.

Fieldwork strategies may involve the use of mechanical equipment (gradall or backhoe) to removefill and to reach the natural soils. The depth at which these soils are encountered should havebeen established during the Phase I and Phase Il excavations. In parts of the District, the use ofmechanical equipment is required to remove the overburden which overlies intact archaeologicalsurfaces or features, often under many feet of fill. Thus, it is important that archaeologists haveexperience using heavy equipment in urban environments in order to conduct the work withoutdisturbing archaeological resources.

If during the project archaeological properties are encountered which contain substantial structuralor architectural remains (i.e. foundations, earthworks, ruins, industrial complexes), the consultingparties will agree on the level and method of recordation documentation necessary for the project.Historic American Building Survey (RABS) or Historic American Engineering Records (HAER)standards and recording techniques may be applied to archaeological resources such asfoundations, wharves, shipways, marine railways, and vessels. Documentation may includerecording significant historical information, architectural plans and features, engineering details,landscape elements, and acquiring significant oral historical information related to the historicproperty.

4. Analysis

Analysis is an integral component of Phase III investigations and is essential for interpreting thefieldwork results and fulfilling data recovery goals. Phase III analytical studies should bedirected towards the retrieval of information from excavated materials to address defined researchquestions. This work must entail: 1) interpretation of site activities, functions, time span, andhistoric contexts; and 2) the study of the research questions/hypotheses addressing the resource'slocal; regional, or national significance. Initial analytical activities should involve theidentification and classification of all artifacts and features according to explicit procedures andusing the best current standards or professional knowledge. Phase III analyses also shouldintegrate the newly acquired data with the results of previous Phase I and Phase II investigations,in order to reliably interpret the site as a whole.

5. Public Education/Interpretation Phase III investigations must include measures to inform thegeneral public and interested parties about the results of data recovery efforts. Since Phase IIIinvestigations essentially mitigate adverse effects to a significant archaeological property and areoften undertaken at considerable public expense, the public should receive tangible evidence ofthe research results.

25

Public education/interpretation may encompass many varied mechanisms and media. Themeasures appropriate for a given project will depend upon the nature of: the project itself, thearchaeological property under study, the resource's location, and the priorities and interests of theinvolved agency, project sponsor and interested public. Public interpretation programs should bedeveloped in consultation with the D.C. State Historic Preservation Office. Upon request theDCSHPO may provide guidance on measures best suited to a particular project and resource.Public interpretation may be implemented during fieldwork or upon completion of analysis andreporting. Consulting parties must consider what methods will be most effective and efficientfor a given project without impeding project schedule and implementation. Public educationshould be aimed at increasing public awareness and sensitivity to' archaeological resourceprotection and include means to safeguard the archaeological property from any potentialvandalism which increased public attention could inadvertently cause. Finally, agencies andproject sponsors should take advantage of the positive public relations benefits which will begenerated by a successful public education program.

The following is a list of possible public education/interpretation efforts:1. Public open house to view fieldwork results;2. Videotape;3. Development of WEB page;4. Newspaper articles/press day;5. Signage on site;6. Pamphlets discussing excavations;7. Tours for school groups8. Slide talks to schools, public interest groups;9. Exhibits or displays.

6. Reporting

,Following the, analysis of archaeological resources, researchers must prepare complete draft andfinal reports on all of the Phase III activities. Chapter VII below contains standards andguidelines for these reports, copies of which must be submitted to the Historic PreservationDivision, by the participating agency.

G. OTHER TREATMENT METHODS

Some examples:1. Develop an Historic Preservation Plan/Cultural Resource Management Plan;2. Development, testing and refinement of a predictive model for site locations of a

particular time, period, type, or geographic region;3. Initiate cultural resource sensitivity, educational, or interpretive programs for

agency staff or the general public;4. Acquire a perpetual historic preservation easement on a significant archaeological

property to compensate for acceptance of loss of a similar site type;

26

5. Prepare and submitting a National Register nomination on an individual historicproperty, district, or -a multiple resource nomination;

6. Synthesize existing archaeological data pertaining to a particula, geographicregion, time period, or resource type.

H. PLAN FOR UNEXPECTED DISCOVERIES

Although completion of a data recovery program or other treatment measure performed pursuantto an MOA fulfills an agency's historic preservation responsibilities, it is advisable to developa plan for addressing unexpected discoveries that may arise during construction. Constructionmay expose significant features that were not included in the data recovery program or wereinaccessible for recovery. The discovery plan may be included as a stipulation of the MOA ora component of a data recovery program. Having an approved plan in place enables the agencyto proceed with the undertaking in a discovery situation following the plan actions and avoids theneed for additional consultation and potential delays. The Advisory Council's regulations (36CFR 800.11) includes provisions for considering properties discovered during projectimplementation.

Discovery plans generally include provrsions for promptly considering and recovenng, ifwarranted, significant archaeological properties discovered during construction. The plan mayincorporate professional archaeological monitoring during project ground disturbing activities withassociated reporting, recording and recovery of major features or artifacts uncovered wherepractical. However. monitoring does not substitute for proper identification. evaluation andtreatment of archaeological properties during project planning. unless there are exceptionalcircumstances.

In the absence of an approved discovery plan, an agency must provide the Advisory Council (forfederal projects) with an opportunity to comment when a previously unidentified property thatmay be eligible for inclusion in the National Register is discovered during projectimplementation.

Federal historic preservation laws do not require the agency to stop all work on the undertakingduring discovery situations. However, the agency should make a good faith effort to avoid orminimize harm to the historic property until it has completed consultation or implementation ofthe discovery plan provisions.

If human remains are discovered during construction, those resources warrant exceptional careand consideration. Any excavation of burials should be preceded by careful consideration,thorough planning and extensive consultation. If a proposed project area contains or is likely tocontain human remains (e.g. based on the proximity of known burials, historical records, oralaccounts, or the results of previous investigations), the project sponsor or archaeologist shouldconsult with HPD to determine an appropriate course of action.

27

The Federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) (25 U.S.C.3001 - 3013) establishes protection and procedures for the treatment of Native American humanburials located on federally-owned property or Indian lands. NAGPRA gives certain rightsregarding the treatment and disposition of human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects andobjects of cultural patrimony to lineal descendants and to federally recognized Indian tribes whenthese groups demonstrate cultural affiliation. The law encourages the avoidance and preservationof archaeological sites which contain Native American burials on federal lands. N.AGPRArequires federal agencies to consult with qualified culturally affiliated Indian Tribes or linealdescendants prior to undertaking any archaeological investigations which may encounter humanremains or upon the unanticipated discovery of human remains on federal land. The consultingparties decide the appropriate treatment and disposition of human remains and other cultura.l itemsrecovered. This consultation may be a lengthy process and should occur early in the projectplanning.

The Historic Preservation Division does not encourage the excavation of human remains, unlessthose remains are imminently threatened by natural or human forces, or unless those resourceshave outstanding research potential. However, cemeteries and burials should be located, recordedand evaluated as archaeological properties when discovered through archaeological investigations.Under D. C. Law it is mandated as to the process to follow when a burial is discovered.

28

)" ",

v. PROCESSING ANDCURATION OF· COLLECDONS, (ARTWACfS" AND .RECORDS) .

At this time, there is DO repository for records and resources retrieved from excavations withinthe District of Columbia. These standards are presented in anticipation of an official repositoryfor the District.

These standards were written by Dr. Gary Shaffer and Ms. Beth Cole of the Maryland HistoricalTrost, as part of the revised Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations inMaryland, 1994. These standards have been effective in ordering and protecting thearchaeological collections from Maryland, and therefore are adapted here, with minor editorialchanges, for the collections from the District of Columbia.

Archaeological investigations generally result in the retrieval of material remains (artifacts,specimens) and the production of associated records (notes, maps, photographs). Materials andrecords are an integral component of an archaeological iIIvestigation. These irreplaceable items,frequently obtained with considerable public and private effort and expeDS~requireprofessional ......processing and curation to. ensure their stability, long term preservation, and accessibility for·~,.".

future research and public interpretation. Archeological collections should be deposited. in a ~ ",::. qualified repository which 'will safeguard and permanently curatethe collection in ..accordance. ;.. • "

with current professicmal staDdards.· . . .

In 1990, the Department ofthe lnteriorlNational Park Service issued federal curation regulations,entitled "Curation of Federally-Owned and Administered Archeological Collections" (36 CFR §79). The federal regulations establish definitions, standards, guidelines, and procedures whichfederal agencies are required to follow, in order to preserve archaeological collections. Theregulations presented in 36 CFR § 79 must be followed for federal compliance projects, asappropriate. Although the regulations are legally applicable only to federal agencies and

.programs, they offer pertinent guidance that may be applied to the treatment of all archaeological; collections. '

The federalcuration regulatioDs provide a useful definition of the term collection, which will befollowed in this document:

Collectiorr meaas material remaiDS that are excavated or removed during asurvey, excavation or other study of a prehistoric or historic resource, andassociated l'Kords that are prepared or assembled in connection with the survey,excavation or other study. [36 CFR § 79.4(a)~ emphasis added].

The standards preseated in this chapter must be followed for all ColleetiODS thateventually win be caraled by tile District. These standards should be followed whencollections are being curated on an interim basis by an Agency or contractor. The.DCSHPOstrongly recommends adherence to these requirements for all other archaeological collectionsgenerated in D.C., in order to standardize curation practices; ensure professionally acceptable

29

treatment of archaeological materials; and facilitate the availability of collections anddocumentation for future research. The District reserves the right to waive all or portions ofthese standards for extraordinary cit cumstances (for example, exceptional collections generatedby non-professionals or from emergency salvage excavations).

This chapter presents the minimum standards and related discussion on the following items: thegoal of the standards, disposition and curation of collections, the processing material remains andassociated records, collection submittal requirements, and sources of technical information.

A. GOAL

The goal of the following minimum standards is to ensure that all archaeological collectionsgenerated by professional or avocational archaeologists in the District receive appropriateprocessing, packaging, documentation, and curatiolL Treatment of collections in accordancewith these minimum standards will help provide for the long term preservation of these materialsand records.

These standards outline overall procedures for the cleaning, labeling, cataloging, packaging,documentation, and curation of collections (including material remains and records). However,these standards are not intended to substitute for more detailed laboratory methods andprocedures, which professionals are expected to have already learned through other sources. Itis assumed that archaeologists will employ the best applicable current standards of professionalknowledge in their treatment of artifacts and records. The procedures presented herein areminimum standards. Professionals are encouraged to utilize additional professionallyrecommended procedures for the treatment and curation of archeological materials and records,whenever appropriate.

The disposition of a project's artifact and records collection should be decided prior to initiation. of fieldwork and in consultation with the HPD. Prior to processing any collection, thearcheologist should contact the selected repository for its procedures on appropriate labeling,cataloging, and packaging techniques.

B. DISPOSITION AND CURAnON OF COLLECTIONS

To ensure the long-term preservation of archeological materials and associated records, collectionsshould be deposited with an appropriate curation repository. The federal curation standardsprovide a definition of the term repository:

Repository means a facility such as a museum, archeological center, laboratory orstorage facility managed by a university, college, museum, other educational orscientific institution, a Federal, State or local Government agency or Indian tribethat can provide professional, systematic and accountable curatorial services on along-term basis. [36 CFR § 79.40)]

30

The regulations also present detailed standards to determine whether a repository has thecapability to provide adequate long-term curatorial services. Required factors include appropriatephysical facilities, temperature and humidity controls, securi ..y, controlled access, fire protectionand suppression, records maintenance and storage, routine inspection, and qualified staff (36 CFR§ 79.9). Collections generated by federal agencies and programs must be curated by anappropriate repository.

In addition to considering a repository's professional qualifications, the federal standards offerfurther guidance on how to select a suitable repository for a collection. In general, it is advisableto curate a collection in a repository which is located in the same state or jurisdiction where thecollection originated, and which maintains other collections from the same site, project area, orbroader geographic region. Collections should not be subdivided and stored in multiple locations,unless such storage is warranted due to conservation, research, exhibit, or other legitimatepurposes. Finally, material remains and their associated records should be curated at the samerepository in order to sustain the collection's integrity and research value (36 CFR § 79.6[bD.

Unfortunately in the District, there is no current repository for archaeological material. Severalfederal agencies have storage facilities, and some of the artifacts are being stored in them. TheGeneral Services Administration (GSA) has conducted a number of archaeological excavationswithin the District, and have provided a facility at the Washington Navy Yard for storage of theseartifacts. It is not an approved facility, that is, it does not conform to the standards as specifiedby 36CFR79, Curation of Federally-Owned and Administered Archaeological Collections. 1991.Currently, the National Park Service is storing some of the D. C. artifacts, however, at this timethey are not willing to acquire any new material. Occasionally a project has occurred in theDistrict in which both National Park Service and local land is excavated. The material excavatedfrom the Park Service land is stored by the National Park Service in their facility, however, thematerial excavated from the local (District) property is to be stored by the District.

Because there is no facility, a number of consultants and Universities are storing the material thatthey have excavated during projects conducted in the District. In one case, a developer is storingthe artifacts from a project on his property, in the building that he built on the land. He willdonate these artifacts to the District when we have a curation facility.

Situations may arise where a property owner requests to keep the material remains recoveredfrom the owner's private property. Under these circumstances, the archeologist should encouragethe owner to donate the collection to a suitable repository by explaining the ethical reasons forappropriate curation and by providing information on incentives for such a donation (tax benefits,recognition, ensuring accessibility for future generations). A repository may be willing to acceptthe entire collection and then loan selected items back to the property owner for display or studypurposes. If a property owner insists on retaining possession of the artifacts recovered from theirproperty, the items must be returned to the owner.

Prior to transfer of material remains to requesting private property owners, the objects should becataloged, processed, and packaged in accordance with minimum professional standards. In

31

addition, the objects should be thoroughly recorded, including photographs and drawings ofdiagnostic artifacts and other objects critical to the interpretation of the archaeological resources..The resulting documentation should be incorporated into any associated collection r...;cords, all ofwhich should be deposited in a suitable repository along with a clear identification of the locationof the transferred material remains in the owner's possession. Finally, the archeologist shouldprovide the owner with written curatorial recommendations on how to store and handle thecollection to avoid or minimize damage and deterioration of the items. The owner also shouldbe supplied with information on incentives for the future donation of the collection to anappropriate repository, and sources for additional technical assistance and advice.

C. PROCESSING MATERIAL REMAINS

Archaeological investigations often produce material remains from the area under study. Thefederal regulations provide the following defmition of material remains:

Material remains means artifacts, objects, specimens and other physical evidencethat are excavated or removed in connection with efforts to locate, evaluate,document, study, preserve or recover a prehistoric or historic resource. [36 CFR§ 79.4(a)(1)]

Material remains may comprise a wide variety ofitems including: architectural elements, artifactsof human manufacture, natural objects used by humans, waste or debris resulting from themanufacture or use of human-made or natural materials, organic materials, human remains,elements of shipwrecks, components of petroglyphs or art works, environmental or chronometricspecimens, and paleontological specimens recovered in direct physical association with aprehistoric or historic resource (36 CFR § 79.4 [a][I][i-xD. The nature and composition of thematerial remains will prescribe its specific handling and treatment. However, the followinggeneral procedures must be followed in the processing of material remains.

1. Cleaning

All artifacts must be cleaned. (Exceptions: Artifacts designated for special studies, such asblood residue analysis, can be curated in an unwashed state. These artifacts must be packagedseparately from the rest of the collection. Containers with these special artifacts must be clearlymarked, and any specific instructions must accompany the artifacts. The artifact inventory mustnote the artifacts' unwashed condition.)

2. Labeling

a. All artifacts must be permanently labeled with provenience informationincluding, at a minimum, the official site number (or X number for isolatedfinds) and official lot number. The artifact label or catalog number is anessential designation which relates the individual object to its provenience ofrecovery. The horizontal location of an artifact in a site and its vertical position

32

within the soil are critical factors for developing accurate site interpretation.Without an appropriate label, this provenience information may become lost andis very difficult, if not impossible, to reconstruct. If an artifact becomes separatedfrom its bag or is removed for study or exhibit purposes, the label ensures that theobject may be returned to its appropriate place.

Archaeologists may add additional designations following the official site and lotnumbers, if desired, to suit individual cataloging and analyses needs. However,the catalog must include a key translating the full provenience system utilized.The HPD recognizes that under certain circumstances, alternative procedures to thelot number system may be warranted. For example, federal agencies may require·consultants to use an agency's own labeling practices. If an alternative system isproposed for collections to be curated by the HPD, prior written concurrence ofthe D.C. State Historic Preservation Office's Archaeologist must be obtainedbefore this option can be employed.

b. Artifacts must be marked directly on their surface using permanentwaterproof ink and a clear overcoat, such as Acryloid B-72. Porous artifactscan receive a clear undercoat as a marking base. Dark artifacts can be preparedfor marking with an undercoat (such as titanium dioxide in Acryloid B-72), ormarked directly with contrasting waterproof ink. The District discourages the useof gesso since it is not long lasting and may peel. Archaeologists must employthe best current standards of professional knowledge in labeling artifacts with ink,sealant, and white backing - when needed. Contact the HPD's Archaeologist fora list of acceptable marking materials and procedures.

c. Artifacts too small to be marked, or impractical to mark for other reasons(such as fragility or unwashed condition), must be placed in perforatedpolyethylene zip-lock bags (minimum thickness =2 mil) or other acceptablepackaging material (see item 3.a below). Provenience information must bewritten in permanent black marker on the bag's exterior, and must be duplicatedwith permanent ink on an archivally stable tag (such as acid-free paper, mylar, ortyvek) enclosed in the bag.

d. For small and large collections (i.e., 2: 200 objects), certain classes of artifacts(e.g. shell, fire-cracked rock, flakes, window glass, nails, brick, slag, mortar,coal) need not be individually labeled. These items may be grouped togetherby material type, within each provenience, and must be marked and bagged asspecified in item D.2.c above. However, all diagnostic artifacts (for example,projectile points and ceramics) must be individually labeled, as feasible. All non­human bone must be labeled, as feasible. Non-human bones too small to beindividually labeled should be processed following the procedures outlined in itemD.2.c above. (See section D.4.c below for a discussion of processing humanremains.)

33

e. All other classes of archeological material (for example processed Doral andsoil samples) must be assigned a lot number and appropriately labeled withprovenience information.

f. All collections must be accompanied by a catalog (see section F) whichincludes a key clearly translating the labeling system employed to record theprovenience information.

3. Packaging

a. Artifacts must be stored in perforated, permanently marked, polyethylenereclosable bags similar to (zip-lock) plastic bags (minimum thickness =2 mil),as feasible. Tiny or delicate objects must be stored in archivally stable, acid-freematerials with appropriate padding and protection (see item D.3.e below).Perforation of plastic bags or other airtight packaging is necessary to allow airexchange and avoid cargo sweat.

b. All plastic bags must be permanently labeled on the exterior and on aninterior tag with appropriate provenience information. Provenience informationmust be written in permanent black marker on the bag's exterior, and must beduplicated with permanent ink on an archivally stable tag (such as acid-free paper,mylar, or tyvek) enclosed in the bag.

c. Artifacts must be grouped and bagged by provenience, and separated bymaterial type within the provenience. (Exceptions may be warranted for smalllot sizes and for legitimate research, conservation, and exhibit purposes. However,the documentation accompanying the collection must provide an explanation andjustification for the organization system employed.)

d. All other classes of material remains (such as Doral and faunal samples) mustbe placed in acceptable, sealed, perforated containers and permanentlylabeled with the provenience information (including site and lot numbers).

e. Archivally stable, acid-free packing materials must be used for packaging aUobjects. Fragile and delicate objects must be specially packaged to ensure properprotection during shipping and storage. The HPD recommends the use of smallacid free boxes padded with acid free foam core or ethafoam blocks. For oversizeitems (such as mill stones, ship's timbers, or architectural elements), contact theDCSHPO's Archaeologist for appropriate packaging recommendations.

f. All artifacts must be placed in acid-free boxes (e.g., "Hollinger") for shippingand final storage. (Use only the box type specified by the designated curatorialrepository.) Artifacts should conform to a consistent system and packaged bycatalog number, whenever possible. The DCSHPO accepts two standard box sizes:

34

1. Standard records box (12.5 11 wide x 1511 long x 10" high), and

11. A half-size box (12.5" wide x 15" long x 5" high).

g. Specialized storage containers or packaging materials may be utilized, ifwarranted. However, use of alternative materials requires the prior written.approval of the DCSHPO Archaeologist.

h. All artifact containers must be permanendy labeled to identify the containers'contents, provenience, and lot numbers.

4. Special Considerations

a. Wet Material Remains: Material remains recovered from submerged sites orwater logged contexts (such as a marshy area or soil levels beneath the watertable) require special handling and treatment to ensure the stability and long termpreservation of the objects. Wet conditions often promote excellent preservationof certain materials, particularly organic remains (such as wood, leather, cloth, andbotanical remains). However, once these materials are excavated and removedfrom their wet environment, rapid deterioration will occur unless the items areappropriately and promptly treated. Projects involving or anticipating the recoveryof wet material remains must include provisions and funding for the appropriatetreatment and conservation of those materials by a trained professionalconservator.

The DCSHPO may refuse to accept collections with unconserved materialremains. For additional guidance on the treatment of wet material remains,contact the DCSHPO's Archaeologist at (202) 727-7360.

b. Conservation: Like wet material remains, certain other types of materials alsorequire professional handling and treatment to ensure their long term preservation.Such items may include metal objects (buttons, buckles, hardware) or organicmaterials (bone implements, leather) which will deteriorate without properstabilization and treatment. The HPD strongly recommends professionalconservation of unstable material remains prior to curation of the collection,whenever possible. Items which particularly warrant conservation include thoseobjects recovered from a site that are critical to the site's interpretation, as wellas exhibit-quality objects. Projects which anticipate the recovery of unstablematerial remains (such as well and privy excavations or intensive historic siteinvestigations) must include provisions and funding for the appropriate treatmentof those materials by a trained professional conservator.

35

The DCSBPO may refuse to accept collections with UDcoDserved materialremains. For additional guidance on the treatment of unstable material remains,contact the DCSHPO's Archaeologist at (202) 727-7360.

c. Human Remains: The HPD does not encourage the excavation and long termcuration of human remains, unless those remains are imminently threatened bynatural or human forces, or unless the remains have outstanding research potential.Procedures for the treatment of human remains and associated grave goods mayvary depending on the anticipated fmal disposition of the remains and the wishesof descendants or culturally affiliated groups. Treatment procedures must beestablished prior to initiating any excavation of human remains or undertaking aproject which anticipates their recovery. Any treatment decisions must conformwith applicable federal and state legislation, regulations, and policies in additionto these standards and guidelines. Chapter vIII.C presents a more detaileddiscussion of special provisions related to human remains and cemeteries.

Contact the DCSHPO Archaeologist for guidance and information on theappropriate handling and treatment of human remains and associated grave goods,at (202) 727-7360.

d. Selective Discarding of Material Remains: Certain types of material may havequestionable long term research value and thus may not warrant permanentcuration with the collection. These materials may include: brick, mortar, slag,coal, shell, and recent 20th century debris (i.e., less than 50 years old). It may bemore prudent to discard these items following analyses, rather than to permanentlycurate the materials with the collection. A project's principal investigator, inconsultation with the DCSHPO, should employ the best professional knowledgeand judgement to decide the most appropriate disposition of these materials.Factors to, consider in reaching the decision to selectively discard materialsinclude: the archeological context of recovery, the items' research potential, theamount and manageability of the materials. The principal investigator shouldcarefully consider the potential future research value of the items. Dependingupon the situation, the selective discard may encompass all, none, or a portion ofthe materials. It may be prudent to retain a sample of the materials slated fordiscard for future study and analyses. Items slated for selective discard must beanalyzed and cataloged. The collection's catalog must specify the types andquantities of discarded materials, along with a justification for the selecteddisposition, and note that the items were discarded.

For further guidance or questions regarding the selective discard of materialremains, contact the DCSHPO Archaeologist at (202) 727-7360.

e. Other Types of Material Remains: Other types of material remains (specimens,flotation and soil samples, etc.) must be appropriately processed before curation.

36

Projects proposing or anticipating the recovery of these types of material remainsshould include adequate provisions in the budget for appropriate processing andspecialized analyses. If sufficient funding is not available for UlalySes, thematerials should be appropriately processed and packaged to ensure their long termpreservation for future analyses. Only thoroughly dried soil samples retained forback-up analyses will be curated without prior processing.

Contact the DCSHPO Archaeologist for further guidance and assistance regardingthe processing, storage and analyses of other types of material remains, at (202)727-7360.

E. PROCESSING ASSOCIATED RECORDS

Archeological investigations also generate important associated records, in addition to thematerials recovered. Federal regulations define these associated records:

Associated records means original records (or copies thereof) that are prepared, assembledand document efforts to locate, evaluate, record, study, preserve or recover a prehistoricor historic resource. [36 CFR § 79.4(2)]

These records may encompass a broad variety of materials including: field notes, maps,drawings, photographs, slides, negatives, films, video and audio tapes, oral histories, artifactinventories, computer disks and diskettes, manuscripts, reports, remote sensing data, publicrecords, archival records, and administrative records relating to the archeological investigations.The materials contain essential documentation of the archeological research and warrantappropriate treatment to ensure their long term preservation for future researchers.

The scope of a given archeological investigation will determine what kinds of associated recordsare produced for the project. The nature and composition of the resulting records will prescribetheir specific handling and treatment. However, the following general procedures must befollowed in the processing of associated records.

1. Required Records

a. HPD must receive the original and one legible acid free copy of all reeordsand submitted for curation with the collection. The original on acid-free paperand one copy on acid-free paper by a heat fusion process (e.g. Xerox dry process)is acceptable, or two copies on acid-free paper. Copies should be submittedunbound, unpunched, double-sided (if feasible), and on 8~" by 11 11 paper.

b. All associated photographic documentation (including transparency slides,negatives, and contact sheets) must be submitted for curation with the collection.Photographic documentation must be prepared on an archivally stable medium

37

using the best known archival processing. The American National StandardsInstitute (ANSI) periodically publishes standards related to photography. Onecomplete copy of the photographic documentation is acceptable.

c. An inventory of all associated records and a catalog of photographicmaterials, along with an explanation of labels must accompany all collections(see section F below).

2. Labeling

a. AIl project records must contain permanent labels. Labels must identify, at aminimum, the project name, site number, and date of preparation. Labels shouldbe clearly written, typed or stamped directly on the records or sleeves, asappropriate, and not on adhesive materials that may be subject to separation.

b. All photographic documentation must be clearly labeled. Labels must contain,at a minimum, the site number, date the photograph was taken, the proveniencewithin the site of the photograph (feature/square, layer/level), and the direction ofview, as appropriate.

3. Packaging

a. All records must be packaged using archivally stable, acid-free materials.Containers must be permanently labeled.

b. All photographic documentation must be stored in archivally stable, acid-freecontainers. Contact the repository prior to packaging for a list of approvedmaterials. Containers must be permanently labeled.

F. CATALOGING MATERIAL REMAINS AND RECORDS

All collections, including the material remains and associated records must be inventoried. Anitemized descriptive catalog(s) must accompany all collections. All catalog records and reportsmust be on an electronic medium. The catalog must provide a detailed description of the items,identifying and classifying the archeological materials and records according to best currentprofessional standards. The catalog maintains an essential record of the objects represented;therefore, it should present as much information about the items as possible. Should an item everbecome lost, stolen, or deteriorate beyond recognition, the catalog may be the only survivingrecord of that item. Catalogs are a means of obtaining information about a collection or specificitems within the collection without handling the actual objects themselves. A detailed catalogwill help minimize the need for subsequent handling of the objects. In addition to item-specificdescriptions, the catalog should specify the collector or donor's name, project name, officialDistrict site and lot numbers, and date of collection.

38

Catalogs are frequently prepared and maintained in a computer database. The Trust stronglyencourages submittal of a copy of the computer database on standard computer storage media,with appropnate labeling and identification ofutilized software, with the collection for permanentcuration. However, two archivally stable paper copies of the inventory also must alwaysaccompany the collection.

To submit a collection to the DCSHPO for permanent curation, the following procedures mustbe followed.

1. Transfer of Ownership Prior to acceptance of a collection, the HPD requires asigned Deed of Gift transferring ownership of the materials to the HPD. Theconsulting archeologist is responsible for informing the project sponsor or propertyowner about the necessity for executing the Deed of Gift prior to transmitting thecollection. The District may make exceptions to the signed Deed of Giftrequirement, in unusual circumstances. However, prior written consent of theHPD staff archeologist is required before acceptance of a collection without aDeed of Gift. In the case of federally owned collections, a signed Memorandumof Understanding for Curatorial Services must accompany the collection. Forcollections owned by District agencies other than the DC State HistoricPreservation Office, a signed interagency Letter of Agreement and Transfer Deedis required. The HPD recognizes that federal and state collections agreements maytake considerable time to execute; and it will agree to take temporary custody ofa government-owned collection, without a signed agreement, only upon writtenconfirmation from the agency that the agreement is forthcoming.

2. Collection Documentation Certain documentation must accompany eachcollection submitted to DCSHPO for curation. The State Historic PreservationOffice Archaeologist [(202) 727-7360] may provide the sample forms mentionedbelow. Comparable forms may be used, provided that those forms contain thesame information in a similar format. All documentation must be submitted onacid-free paper. The following items constitute the required documentation whichmust be submitted with each collection.

a. A completed document which transfers ownership of the collection to HPDor authorizes the DCSHPO to provide curatorial services:

i. DEED OF GIFT (for collections from non-District or non-federalownership)

ii. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FORCURATORIAL SERVICES (for federally-owned collections)

iii. LEITER OF AGREEMENT and TRANSFER DEED (forDistrict-owned collections).

39

b. Two copies of a typed and complete HPD ARCHEOLOGICALSPECIMEN CATALOG, or an DCSHPO-approved equivalent. Thesemust be submitted on acid-free paper as an original and one l opy.

c. A list of all associated records (see item E.1.c above).

d. A list of conserved objects, along with the conservator's report ofconservation treatment(s) and photographic documentation.

e. A list of those objects needing conservation treatment, with ajustification of why the material was not conserved by the currentproject.

3. Inspection

Acceptance of any collection is subject to inspection and approval by the HPD's staff archeologistor collections manager. Through inspection, the DCSHPO strives to ensure adequacy of artifactand record processing, packaging, and documentation. Collections not meeting the minimumrequirements stipulated herein will be returned to the donor at the donor's expense. For thisreason, close coordination with the HPD's Staff Archeologist is required. For large collections(more than 10 boxes), pre-shipment inspection by the staffarcheologist or the collections managerthe donor's facility is recommended.

4. Shippingtrransmittal

a. Shipment/transmittal of collections is the responsibility of 'the donor.Collections should be packaged using inert material and sufficiently secured toavoid any in-shipment damage. Collections will not be accepted unless the HPDstaff archeologist receives notification at least 48 hours prior to delivery and issueswritten or verbal approval for the transmittal.

H. SOURCES OF TECHNICAL INFORMATION

Additional guidance and technical information on the appropriate processing and curationof collections may be found in the following sources:

Preserving Field Records (Kenworthy et al. 1985)~

A Conservation Manual for the Field Archeologist (Sease 1987);Curation of Federally-Owned and Administered Collections: Final Rule (36 CFR § 79);National Park Service Museum Handbook Part I: Museum Collections (NPS 1990B); and,National Park Service Museum Handbook Part II: Museum Records (NPS 1987).

40

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) periodically issues various technicalpublications, including standards relevant to the processing and storage of associated records(paper and photographic documentation). Public libraries generally maintain the current catalogof ANSI publications. For further information on ANSI, contact the American NationalStandards Institute, 11 West 42nd Street, New York, New York 10036, (212) 642-4900.

41

VI. REPORTING STANDARDS FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES

The following sections provide guidance for producing professional reports that comply with theDCSHPOs recommendations for archaeological projects in the District. Separate report standardsare presented for Phase I Archaeological Survey; Phase IT Archaeological Testing; and Phase illArchaeological Data Recovery studies. Each report standard follows the same overallorganization, with differences where appropriate to the level of the investigation.

In a general sense, the District's archaeological resources belong to the citizens of the city andof the nation. Thus, the DCSHPO requires that professional archaeological reports be distributedto certain specified repositories. One copy of each fmal report submitted to and accepted by theDCSHPO (with high quality photographic reproduction of graphics and photographs) shall besubmitted to the following institutions:

District of Columbia Archives;Washington Historical Society; and,Martin Luther King, Jr. Library.

The DC HPD shall be responsible for submitting fmal copies of archaeological studies to theseinstitutions.

A. REPORT GUIDELINES FOR PHASE I (IDENTIFICATION) STUDIES

1. CoverList of document repositories (e.g. libraries, SHPOs office) on inside of cover

. 2. Title pagea. Title of report, which includes name, project type (phase I,Identification), and

location of the project; cover of report must contain same titleb. Author(s) of report (including specialists) and

organizational affiliationsc. Principal investigator(s) of projectd. Agency and/or client for which report prepared with contract number(s)e. Date of current version of reportf. Indication whether draft or final reportg. Name of archaeological site(s) and developmenth. Report number assigned by D.C. archaeology office

3. Abstract or Management SummaryA summary, generally no more than a page long, providing information on:a. Purpose of the undertakingb. Sponsor of the undertakingc. Physiographic zone of project location and section of D.C.d. Definition of Area of Potential Effecte. Research strategy

42

f. Findings: brief summary of cultural remains encountered, if any, approximatedate(s) of cultural remains, and significance or potential significance of the culturalremains

g. Integrity of Depositsh. Project impact on cultural remainsI. RecommendationsJ. Repository of collections and project records

4. Public report summaryWill be included in body of report, but must be able to function as a stand-alonedocument. This public report summary will be two to five pages in length and orientedtoward a non-specialist audience. Summary is intended to tell the "story" of the site. Therecommendations for more, or no further, excavation should be part of this document.

5. Table of ContentsMust include entries for all report chapters, headings and subheadings, lists of figures,tables, etc., including page numbers for all entries, including:a. Chaptersb. List of Figures (includes any graphic illustration in a single numerical sequence;

e.g. no separate numbering schemes for maps, photographs, soil profiles, etc.)c. List of Tablesd. References citede. Appendicesf. Acknowledgements

6. Introductiona. Purpose of project, including both management and research reasons for

conducting the projectb. Description of project and brief statement of resultsc. Project administration and organization, including identifying the sponsor(s)d. Specific reason(s) or law(s) calling for current historic preservation worke. Brief description and location of project area, including lot and square numbers,

and including size of project area in acres and hectaresf. Brief description of methodsg. Dates of project undertaking, including background research and field

investigationsh. Refer to related historic preservation studies for the project1. Summary of results of this research

7. Project Location and General Descriptiona. Current street address and maps clearly showing the project's location within the

District of Columbia and its relation to surrounding streets and other aspects of theurban landscape (one map will be appropriate USGS 7.5' quadrangle and one ormore maps will be at a larger scale)

43

b. Present land usec. Description of current conditions, including ground cover, surface features,

disturbance, etc. (must include photograph.s) and map(s) illustrating currentconditions)

d. Physiographic zone

8. Research Designa. Provide a detailed statement of objectives, including applicability of work to

regional research questionsb. Provide an explicit statement giving the basis on which cultural remains will be

interpreted and evaluated, discussing (but not limited to)i. identifying past and current land-use patterns in the project area and

surrounding area, as appropriate11. identifying social groups and any key individuals associated with activities

in the project area111. identifying residential patterns and community organization as they change

through timeIV. identifying past construction activities that may have destroyed or impacted

cultural remains in the study areav. development of research questions to assess the potential eligibility of the

resourcesc. Develop a locational model for prehistoric and historic cultural remainsd. Describe the objectives and rationale of locational model for prehistoric and

historic cultural remains

9. Results of Archival and Background Researcha. Methods and techniques of archival research, including list of institutions where

archival or background research was conducted and types of resources consulted. at the aforementioned institutions

b. Past' and present natural environments, as appropriatec. Concise synopsis of prehistoric cultural record of the physiographic area and of

the local area, to an appropriate level of detaild. Concise synopsis of historic cultural record of the District of Columbia, including

any significant events occurring in the project areae. Critical review of previous prehistoric and historic investigations within or near

the project areaf. Narrative overview of historic land use of project area, including:

i. historic maps with project area clearly indicated on eachii. information from other sources, including newspapers, fire insurance maps,

and historic photographs111. informant interviews with current or former resident(s), if any, of the

project area and adjacent properties within the project neighborhood

44

g. A list of identified cultural resources in the project area keyed to a map of theproject area

10. Methods and techniques of field investigationsFor Identification projects that include a component of testinga. Limits of project area versus area investigated, if differentb. Sampling design and rationalec. Testing methods and rationaled. Map(s) of the project area clearly delineating areas tested and the different testing

methods employed

11. Field ResultsFor Identification projects that include a component of testinga. A review of site stratigraphy, including relevant profiles and soils descriptionsb. Summary of cultural features, including plans, profiles, and photographsc. Map(s) of identified cultural remainsd. Discussion of site chronology

12. Methods and techniques of artifact analysesFor Identification projects that include a component of testinga. A glossary defming and describing artifact categories and/or material types used,

known dates for artifact categories, and references used to create definitions ofartifact categories

b. A descriptive summary by provenience and artifact category (can be included asan appendix and in digital format)

c. Table(s) summarizing major artifact categories by provenienced. Distribution/density map(s) of major artifact categoriese. Photographs and/or drawings of diagnostic artifactsf. Discussion of artifact analyses with reference to published comparable studiesg. Discussion of relevance to addressing research questions

13. InterpretationThis should include primarily a discussion of the information derived from the fieldresearch and analysis as applied to the cultural context, locational model for culturalremains, and relevance of results to addressing research questions.a. Discuss aspects of background, fieldwork, and artifact analyses used for basis of

interpretationsb. Discuss function(s) and distribution(s) of cultural remainsc. Assess the applicability of the locational model for historic and prehistoric cultural

remainsd. Assess the reliability of the datae. Assess the results of the interpretations against the goals of the studyf. Discuss the future research potential of the project area and the cultural remains

recovered during the undertaking

45

g. Discuss what is now known that was not known prior to the projecth. Discuss how the project contributes to an understanding of D.C. 's past

14. Summary and Recommendationsa. Summary of results and evaluation of methods and techniques employedb. Assessment of impact of proposed construction on identified cultural propertiesc. Assess need for additional investigations or mitigation alternativesd. List all public benefits derived from project

15. References CitedFollow latest published guidelines from American Antiquity, using Historical Archaeologyfor historic documents. The Chicago Manual of style will be consulted for items notincluded in the aforementioned published guidelines.

16. Appendicesa. Qualifications of investigatorsb. Scope of workc. Full copies of special studies (faunal, soil analyses, etc.)d. Artifact Inventorye. Relevant historic documents referred to in text (e.g. deeds, probate inventories,

etc.)f. Relevant project correspondenceg. National Archaeological Database - Reports Recording Form

B. REPORT GUIDELINES FOR PHASE n (EVALUATION) STUDIES

1. CoverList of document repositories (e.g. libraries, SHPOs office) on inside of cover

2. Title pagea. Title of report, which includes name, project type (Phase II, Evaluation), and

location of the project; cover of report must contain same titleb. Author(s) of report, including specialists, and their organizational affiliationsc. Principal investigator(s) of projectd. Agency and/or client for which report prepared with contract number(s)e. Date of current version of reportf. Indication whether draft or final reportg. Name of archaeological site(s) and developmenth. Report number assigned by D.C. archaeology office

3. Abstract or Management SummaryA summary, generally no more than a page long, providing information on:a. Purpose of the undertaking

46

b. Sponsor of the undertakingc. Physiographic zone of project location and section of D.C.d. Size of project and percent previously disturbede. Research strategy implemented during the undertakingf. Findings: brief summary of cultural remains encountered, if any, approximate

date(s) of cultural remains, and significance or potential significance of thecultural remains

g. Integrity of Depositsh. Project impact on cultural remains1. Recommendations

4. Public report summaryWill be included in body of report, but must be able to function as a stand-alonedocument. This public report summary will be five to ten pages in length and orientedtoward a non-specialist audience. Summary is intended to tell the "story" of the siteand why it is (or is not) eligible for listing on the National Register

5. Table of ContentsMust include entries for all report chapters, headings and subheadings, lists of figures,tables, etc., including page numbers for all entries, includinga. Chaptersb. List of Figures (includes any graphic illustration in a single numerical

sequence; e.g. no separate numbering schemes for maps, photographs, soilprofiles, etc.)

c. List of Tablesd. References citede. Appendicesf. Acknowledgements

6. Introductiona. Purpose of project, including both management and research reasons for

conducting the projectb. Description of project and brief statement of resultsc. Project administration and organization, including identifying the sponsor(s)d. Specific reason(s) or law(s) calling for current historic preservation worke. Brief description and location of project area, including size of project area in

acres and hectaresf. Brief description of methodsg. Dates of project undertaking, including background research and field

investigationsh. Refer to related historic preservation studies for the project, including the

Identification report1. Summary of results of this research

47

7. Project Location and General Descriptiona. Current street address and maps clearly showing the project's location within

the District of Columbia and its relation to surrounding streets and other aspectsof the urban landscape (one map will be appropriate USGS 7.5' quadrangle andone or more maps will be at a larger scale)

b. Present land usec. Description of current conditions, including ground cover, surface features,

disturbance, etc. (must include photograph(s) and map(s) illustrating currentconditions)

d. Physiographic zone

8. Research DesignFor Evaluation projects, the research design will be developed in coordination with theSHPOs office.a. Provide a detailed statement of objectives, including applicability of work to

regional research questionsb. Provide an explicit statement giving the basis on which cultural remains will be

interpreted and evaluated. Specifically include only additional research notincluded in the Identification phase. Should include discussing (but not limitedto)1. identifying past and current land-use patterns for the specific site

location11. identifying social groups and any key individuals associated with

activities in the project areaiii. identifying residential patterns and community organization as they

change through timeIV. identifying past construction activities that may have destroyed or

impacted cultural remains in the study areav. development of research questions that will evaluate the significance of

cultural remains in the project area

9. Results of Archival and Background Researcha. Methods and techniques of archival research, including list of institutions where

archival or background research was conducted and types of resourcesconsulted at the aforementioned institutions

b. Past and present natural environments, from earliest prehistoric habitation of thearea

c. Concise synopsis of prehistoric cultural record of the physiographic area and ofthe local area

d. Concise synopsis of historic cultural record of the District of Columbia,including any significant events occurring in the project area

e. Critical review of previous prehistoric and historic investigations within or nearthe project area

48

f. Narrative overview of historic land use of project area, including:i. chain of titleii. tax and census information on owner~ and tenantsiii. land surveys and plat informationiv. information from other sources, including newspapers, fire insurance

maps, and historic photographsv. informant interviews with current or former resident(s), if any, of the

project area and adjacent properties within the project neighborhoodVI. historic maps with project area clearly indicatedVll. city directoriesviu. building permits

h. A list of identified cultural resources in the project area keyed to a map of the'project area

10. Methods and techniques of field investigationsInclude within the body of the report an overview of this section. Detaileddescriptions should be included as a separate appendix referred to from the body of thereport.a. Limits of project area versus area investigated, if differentb. Sampling design and rationalec. Testing methods and rationaled. Map(s) of the project area clearly delineating areas tested and the different

testing methods employed

11. Field ResultsInclude within the body of the report an overview of this section. Detaileddescriptions should be included as a separate appendix referred to from the body of thereport.a. A review of site stratigraphy, including relevant profiles and soils descriptionsb. Summary of cultural features, including plans, profiles, and photographsc. Map(s) of identified cultural remainsd. Discussion of site chronology

12. Methods and techniques of artifact analysesInclude within the body of the report an overview of this section. Detaileddescriptions should be included as a separate appendix referred to from the body of thereport.a. A glossary defining and describing artifact categories and/or material types

used, known dates for artifact categories, and references used to createdefinitions of artifact categories

b. A descriptive summary by provenience and artifact category (can be includedas an appendix and in digital format)

c. Table(s) summarizing major artifact categories by provenienced. Distribution/density map(s) of major artifact categories

49

e. Photographs and/or drawings of diagnostic artifactsf. Discussion of artifact analyses with reference to published comparable studiesg. Discussion of relevance to addressing research questions

13. InterpretationThis should include primarily a discussion of the information derived from the fieldresearch and analysis as applied to the cultural context, locational model for culturalremains, and relevance of results to addressing research questions.a. Discuss aspects of background, fieldwork, and artifact analyses used for basis

of interpretationsb. Discuss function(s) and distribution(s) of cultural remainsc. Assess the applicability of the locational model for historic and prehistoric

cultural remainsd. Assess the reliability of the datae. Assess the results of the interpretations against the goals of the studyf. Discuss the future research potential of the project area and the cultural remains

recovered during the undertaking

14. Summary and Recommendationsa. Summary of results and evaluation of methods and techniques employedb. Assessment of impact of proposed construction on identified cultural propertiesc. Assess need for additional investigations or mitigation alternativesd. Assessment of National Register eligibility (phase ITs only)e. List all public benefits derived from project

15. References CitedFollow latest published guidelines from American Antiquity, using HistoricalArchaeology for historic documents. The Chicago Manual of style will be consultedfor items not included in the aforementioned published guidelines.

16. Appendicesa. Qualifications of investigatorsb. Scope of workc. Full copies of special studies (faunal, soil analyses, etc.)d. Artifact Inventorye. Relevant historic documents referred to in text (e.g. deeds, probate inventories,

etc.)f. Relevant project correspondenceg. National Archaeological Database - Reports Recording Form

50

C. REPORT GUIDELINES FOR PHASE m (TREATMENT) STUDIES

1. CoverList of document repositories (e.g. libraries, SHPOs office) on inside of cover

2. Title pagea. Title of report, which includes name, project type (phase ill, Treatment), and

location of the project; cover of report must contain same titleb. Author(s) of report, including specialists, and their organizational affiliationsc. Principal investigator(s) of projectd. Organizational affiliations of author(s), including specialist(s), and principal

investigator(s)e. Agency and/or client for which report prepared with contract numbens)f. Date of current version of reportg. Indication whether draft or fmal reporth. Name of archaeological site(s) and development1. Report number assigned by D.C. archaeology office

•Purpose of the undertakingSponsor of the undertakingPhysiographic zone of project location and section of D.C.Size of project and percent previously disturbedResearch strategy implemented during the undertakingFindings: brief summary of cultural remains encountered, if any, approximatedate(s) of cultural remains, and significance or potential significance of thecultural remainsIntegrity of DepositsProject impact on cultural remainsRecommendationsRepository of collections and project records

c.d.e.f.

g.h.1.

J.

3. Abstract or Management SummaryA summary, generally no more than a page long, providing information on:a.b.

4. Public report summary and public involvementWill be included in body of report, but must be able to function as a stand-alonedocument. This public report summary will be 15 to 30 pages in length and orientedtoward a non-specialist audience. Summary is intended to tell the "story" of the site.The public report summary is considered the minimal effort toward public involvementfor the Treatment phase. Additional public involvement will include one or more ofthe following: on-site tours, on-site interpretive displays, public lectures, audiovisualmedia, and brochures (a standardized example will be provided in the guidelines).

51

5. Table of ContentsMust include entries for all report chapters, headings and subheadings, lists of figures,tables, etc., including page numbers for all entries, includinga. Chaptersb. List of Figures (includes any graphic illustration in a single numerical

sequence; e.g. no separate numbering schemes for maps, photographs, soilprofiles, etc.)

c. List of Tablesd. References citede. Appendicesf. Acknowledgements

6. Introductiona. Purpose of project, including both management and research reasons for

conducting the projectb. Description of project and brief statement of resultsc. Project administration and organization, including identifying the sponsor(s)d. Specific reason(s) or law(s) calling for current historic preservation worke. Brief description and location of project area, including size of project area in

acres and hectaresf. Brief description of methodsg. Dates of project undertaking, including background research and field

investigationsh. Refer to related historic preservation studies for the project, including

Identification and Evaluation phases1. Brief summary of results

7. Project Location and General Descriptiona. Current street address and maps clearly showing the project's location within

the District of Columbia and its relation to surrounding streets and other aspectsof the urban landscape (one map will be appropriate USGS 7.5' quadrangle andone-or more maps will be at a larger scale)

b. Present land usec. Description of current conditions, including ground cover, surface features,

disturbance, etc. (must include photograph(s) and map(s) illustrating currentconditions)

d. Physiographic zone

8. Description of Previous InvestigationsDescribe what is known about the project area based on results of Identification andEvaluation phases.

52

9. Research DesignFor Evaluation projects, the research design will be developed in coordination with theSHPOs office.a. Provide a detailed statement of objectives, including applicability of work to

regional research questionsb. Provide an explicit statement giving the basis on which cultural remains will be

interpreted and evaluated, discussing (but not limited to)i. identifying social groups and any key individuals associated with

activities in the project area11. identifying residential patterns and community organization as they

change through timeiii. development of research questions that will evaluate the significance of

cultural remains in the project area

10. Results of Archival and Background Researcha. Methods and techniques of archival research, including list of institutions where

archival or background research was conducted and types of resourcesconsulted at the aforementioned institutions

b. Past and present natural environments, from earliest prehistoric habitation of thearea, when appropriate

c. Concise synopsis of prehistoric cultural record of the physiographic area and ofthe local area, if appropriate

d. Concise synopsis of historic cultural record of the District of Columbia,including any significant events occurring in the project area, if appropriate

e. Critical review of previous prehistoric and historic investigations within or nearthe project area

f. Narrative overview of historic land use of project area, including:i. chain of titleii. tax and census information on owners and tenants111. land surveys and plat informationIV. information from other sources, including newspapers, fire insurance

maps, and historic photographsv. informant interviews with current or former resident(s), if any, of the

project area and adjacent properties within the project neighborhoodg. A list of identified cultural resources in the project area keyed to a map of the

project area

11. Methods and techniques of field investigationsInclude within the body of the report an overview of this section. Detaileddescriptions should be included as a separate appendix referred to from the body of thereport.a. Limits of project area versus area investigated, if differentb. Sampling design and rationalec. Testing methods and rationale

53

d. Map(s) of the project area clearly delineating areas tested and the differenttesting methods employed

12. .Field ResultsInclude within the body of the report an overview of this section. Detaileddescriptions should be included as a separate appendix referred to from the body of thereport.a. A review of site stratigraphy, including relevant profiles and soils descriptionsb. Summary of cultural features, including plans, profiles, and photographsc. Map(s) of identified cultural remainsd. Discussion of site chronology

13. Methods and techniques of artifact analysesInclude within the body of the report an overview of this section. Detaileddescriptions should be included as a separate appendix referred to from the body of thereport.a. A glossary defming and describing artifact categories and/or material types

used, known dates for artifact categories, and references used to createdefinitions of artifact categories

b. A descriptive summary by provenience and artifact category (can be includedas an appendix and in digital format)

c. Table(s) summarizing major artifact categories by provenienced. Distribution/density map(s) of major artifact categoriese. Photographs and/or drawings of diagnostic artifactsf. Discussion of artifact analyses with reference to published comparable studiesg. Discussion of relevance to addressing research questionsh. Provide location of where artifacts and documentation are curated

. 14. InterpretationThis should include primarily a discussion of the information derived from the fieldresearch and analysis as applied to the cultural context, locational model for culturalremains, and relevance of results to addressing research questions.a. Discuss aspects of background, fieldwork, and artifact analyses used for basis

of interpretationsb. Discuss function(s) and distribution(s) of cultural remainsc. Assess the applicability of the locational model for historic and prehistoric

cultural remainsd. Assess the reliability of the datae. Assess the results of the interpretations against the goals of the studyf. Discuss the future research potential of the project area and the cultural remains

recovered during the undertaking

54

"15. Summary and Recommendationsa. Summary of results and evaluation of methods and techniques employedb. Assessment of impact of proposed construction on identified cultur.J propertiesc. Assess need for additional investigations or mitigation alternativesd. Assessment of National Register eligibility (phase ITs only)e. List all public benefits derived from project

16. References CitedFollow latest published guidelines from American Antiquity, using HistoricalArchaeology for historic documents. The Chicago Manual of style will be consultedfor items not included in the aforementioned published guidelines.

17. Appendicesa. Qualifications of investigatorsb. Scope of workc. Full copies of special studies (faunal, soil analyses, etc.)d. Artifact Inventorye. Relevant historic documents referred to in text (e.g. deeds, probate inventories,

etc.)f. Relevant project correspondenceg. National Archaeological Database - Reports Recording Form

D. STANDARDS FOR ILLUSTRATIONS, INCLUDING MAPS, DRAWINGS, ANDPHOTOGRAPHSa. All illustrations must be cited in the text body of the report and must be placed

on a page immediately following the citation or in the appropriate order, ifmultiple illustrations are cited in the text body

b. Informative title, including location and orientation of camera for allphotographs, with necessary captions

c. Scale or indication that source lacks a scaled. North arrow for mapse. Clarityf. Utility of illustrations is stressed; they must provide useful information which

cannot readily be transmitted in written formg. Color coding of maps can be done where appropriate, though red and green

should be avoided as color choicesh. Digital photographic images can be used in place of actual photographs if the

digital image resolution is at least 600 dots per inch (horizontal and vertical)and the image is produced on a printer with a resolution of at least 600 dots perinch (horizontal and vertical).

55

REFERENCES CITED

Louis Berger & Associates, Inc. (LBA)'1993 Archaeological Mitigation Plan, Jenkins Farm Archaeological Site (51SE4) District of

Columbia, Outer Branch Avenue Segment, Green Line (F) Route Washington AreaRegional Metrorail System. Prepared for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit!Authority, Washington, DC.

1994 Archaeological and Historical Investigations of the Jenkins Farm Site (51SE4) Districtof Columbia, Outer Branch Avenue Segment, Green Line (F) Route Washington AreaRegional Metrorail System. 2 Volumes. Prepared for the Washington MetropolitanArea Transit Authority, Washington, DC.

56

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM

~ .... _.... --_ .. - -_ .... _..

Dis~ric~ of ColumbiaHis~oric,Preservation Division614 H S~ree~ NWUashington, DC 20001

1. SIIE NAME (S)

(

tm1 111111111"llillllZONE EASTIl\G ---rIDltTHING

QUADSQUARE LOT _

Other Ilumber(s):

SQUARE 5302. DCHPD SITE NUMBER Assigned by:

51NW106 L. HENLEY DEAN

ITT Private

I I Public

ALONZO O. BLISS PROPERTIES

3. STREET 6. NUMBER (Parcel/Reservat'ion.'; deta.iled description of how Co reaCf,SQUARE 530 site 1£ appropriace)BOUNDED BY G STREET, TIlIRD STREET, F STREET, AND FOURTH STREET, N. \oJ •____~~~:--~~~~~__.~._-.j$ ... -'u· ...... _

l4. O\n\ER(S) M1> ADDRESS (£5)

LI Avocational Collector LI Other (~!-':'~

17 17th Cencury1'7 18th 'CenturyT"JJ 19th cencurvlxI 20th Cen~ury

applicable boxes)17 Early Woodland1'7 Middle Woodlan~.T7 Late Woodland/~ '\.'1'7 Contact1 1 Other (specify)

Estimated Occupation ,Range: CA. 1829-1960

5. SIIE LOCAtED BY iLl C1U'1 SurveyJOHN MILNER ASSOCIATES

6. PERIOD(S) (Check all17 Paleo1'7 Early Archaic

.1'7 Middle Archaic1'7 Late Archaic1-1 Unknown Prehistoric

7. DATING METHODS LI C1t. 1-1 Relative dating methods (specify)

111 Docu~en~ary search (s~ecify types Gfsource~ ;and list) (maps, deeds, etc.)

-HISTORIC MAPS SHOWING IMPROVEMENTS

lxI Diagnostic material& (specify)

HISTORIC CERAMICS, GLASS

10. GENERAlIZED SITE PROFILEType of 5011(5) Cul~ural Mal£

s. SITE TYPE -' _ _ _Pren1s~or1c: 1 I·Camp 1 1 Village 1 1 Quarry

T7 Fishing Camp 17 WorkshopHis~oric: I~arm hf7 Domest1~ I~ Military_ 1 I Industrtal i:!1 Commercial

1-1 Unknown 1-1 Other (specify)

9. DESCRIBE SITE DIMENSIONS AND BOUNDARIESSQUARE BOUNDED BY G STREET, THIRD STREET,F STREET, AND FOURTII STREET, N. W•DIMENSIONS ARE 190' EAST-WEST BY245' NORTH-SOUTH

Describe site type & funct1(

DOMESTIC NEIGHBORHOODCA. 1829-1960sCOMMERCIAL PARKINGLOT 19605-1993

SEEATTACHED

I-----Indicate Depth of Levels

~ Slope of Ground L-~ 0-5 1-1 5-15 1-1 ·5-~

IZ- ....c:~- -::"-4Z

11. STRATIGRAPHY SURFACE INDICATORSIXI Stratified IXI No visible evidence

I~ Not stratified 1'7 Surface finds I-Y Other (specif)1 I Stratigr£phy not determined 1 1 Standing r~1ns --------- -----~------------lr__------~--~------I 12. SOIL USDA 5011 Series Contour rlevati~~

SITE CONSISTS OF URBAN FILL 40' A.M.S.L.: Acidit)" 1-1<4.5 LI 4.5-5.5 LI 5.6-6.5 LI 6.6-i.3 ! 1-7.4-6.'

15. CURREl-."T GROUND- COVER

IX I flood plain I I Terrace / I Valley slope "T7 upland:.~ Stream cut 7lV Other (sp~ify) FILLED IN HISTORIC-PERIOD ~

ASPHALT

I Distance from siteI 10,000 FT

RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIALBUILDINGS AND YARDS

PAST LAND USE (Describe)

~earest sourcePOTOMAC RIVER

1 3 • TOPOGRAF H1

16. CURRENT LAND USE/-Y Vacant /~ Residential~ Parkland / / Institutional~ Commercial / / Industrial/X/ Parking lot / / Other (specify)

14. \.lATER

II

~ ~'" I) ,

17. SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT I I Open land / I \1aterfront / yJ Commercial/ / Industrial / / \Joodland I / Residential I XI O~her (specifYr ~~i~is

lB. SITE INTEGRITY Degree of Disturbance~ Undisturbed I-Y Slightly disturbed 117 Moderately disturbed~ Extensively disturbed ~ UnknoYn- - .

Type of Disturbance I / Natural ~auses / / Scientific excavationIX/ Non-scientific excavation /-y Extensive surface collection/X/ Construction IXI Utility trenches I~ Road/H1ghvay /X/ Grading~ Periodic inundation I-Y Long term itnindation -lxI Buried site/urban fi~ / I Unknovn I / Other (specify)

19. THREATS- TO SITE / J Reneval / I Highways I I Private / / Vandalism/7 Deterioration I~ Developers I-Y Zoning 1/ Unknovn1.:1/ Other (specify)- DEVELOPMENT BIGSA -

20. ACCESSIBILITY ~O PUBLIC 1-1 Free access 1Jl1 Need ovperts permission1-/ Restricted 1-/ No access .

21. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS By Whom/Affiliation Date

Scientific Investigations// Surface collected .T] Tested.I / Excavated

POTENTIAL ASSESSED BY ENGINEERING­SCIENCE (PAPPAS ET AL. 1992)

Non-scientific Investigations// Surface" collected/ / Excavated ,

22. PRESENT LOCATIO~ OF MATERIALS

DocumentaryHISTORICAL MAPS INCLUDE USGS 1983,ELLICOTT 1800, KING 1803, TANNER 1836,KElLY 1850, BOSCHKE 1861, FAEHTZ ANDPRATT 1874, GREENE 1880, HOPKINS 1892,BAIST 1903, SANBORN 1888, 1904, 1928,1956, AND 1984.

JOHN MILNER ASSOCIATES, 5250 CHEROKEE AVENUE, FOURTH FLOOR, ALEXANDRIA, VA, 2231223. Pu~LISHED REFERENCES TO SITE

PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS FOR THE FBI WASHINGTOK FIELD OFFICE,PAPPAS ET AL. 1992. ENGINEERING-SCIENCE

(Identify in detail, including features, burials, relate:outbuildings, landscape features. etc.)

Archaeological

BURIED MID-19TH C YARD DEPOSITSLATE 19TH C.STRUCTURE FOUNDATIONSTURN OF CENTURY YARD DEPOSITS

RECOVER.E.D DATA2[..-t3c::

'<C&JV)I&Jc:::

-3CrL':'~C.:"'OG~c..:..2.. SI7I IJ;\·E~~TOF.Y FORJ-~ PE' 32j. ATTACH TO THIS FORM THE PORTIO~ OF USGS QUAD ~ITH 511£ AA£A~

I~-...f

I I t I~-, I I I I

I I ! • I I I I I J- t I I - I I II

I I ; I ; I,t I

: , . , I I

I II

I I "'"t I I ~ I I

I I I I . I

I I , I . I

I I . i J I II I I t -I I I I I. I 1 I I.

I I I

-""""""'"" - --I .-:- , 1

,I . : ; I ~ I I . --. I . , 1 I. I , . · , I 1" , (

I I I i I 1, I 1 I I I ! , I r II I 1 _l... I I I

I- f-- ..t

+-~ f-i- .... 1-1-10-'._.

; I

I I 1 f,-!. . -- I-~ 1 · II, I I , 0 I

I . I I I I I · I ,

· I I - I"-:""" f-~.

IT~ -I I I I~

JI ; · t : I I, · I I ; I I I . II I l..J- ! , . I I . .- I I I . II

---1~ -:..- I- ...- ~-_. -.....-. W- .... I I

-~_.

I 1 -~

- 1- -- -1-. ..;- 1-- ~..t_f- ~- - -- ! I-...:.. -- ~ ..- ..~- _.. .~1-- =- - - . ~- - -:-

I I ,-- ~ r--- ~- .. .-iTI , I ,I I I

i .-H- -- -- ...: II I 1 T t I 1

.- j ..J. ~- I -J_~ ._- -:-.~ - -- - ,- ...:. .f--- --1..,.-I IT

-I--:- ..---I- ~- -T. --I"'"~I 1 I , I I

I I I I I I I - + -. . I J J J I.-I I I I , I I J 1 ~ 1 I I I

1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I~I 1 I 1 1 I I --. 1 I , I I

...1"- I t iI I I I iI I 1 I

, I I I I I I I I . JI I I I I 1

••

•

26. SKETCH p~ OF SITEN SEE ATTACHED

iScale:

•

~,. PHC70GR}~H5 (Attach if available. Label each with: date of photo. phctogrQp~

view shown, name of site, site number. ~ere negative is filed.)

28. LAh~MARK STATUS I I Listeo in National Register I I Not eligibleIXI Eligible to~R under criteria I-Y A, ,-y B, ~ C, 117 D.~ Listed as D.C. Landmark I-Y Not eligible to-landmarks listI I Eligible for Landmark li6t~nder criteria 1 11 I 12 / 13 I I' Fi: 1/6

29. ARCHAEOLOGICAL ~~/OR HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE (Describe. Give als~ the=at~:

categories as appropriate)ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES RECOMMENDEDELIGIBLE FOR NATIONAL REGISTER UNDER CRITERION D•

ARCHAEOLOGICAl SITE Il\'VEh'TOR':" FORM30. ADDITIONAL l~fORMAIION

Pr L

TECHNICAL REPORT OF PHASE II INVESTIGATIONS BEING PREPARED FOR GENERAL SERVICES~ ADMINISTRATION BY JOHN MILNER ASSOCIATES, INC. (AUGUST 1993)

31. REPORTED BY

Name DONNA J. SEIFERT1

Organization JOHN MILNER ASSOCIATES, INC.

•.'.

•

i

Address 5250 CHEROKEE AVE., 4TH FLOOR, ALEXANDRIA, VA 22312

FOR OFFICE USE ONLYFIELD EVALUATION ~I S1~e inspected/verified

By Whom:

CO!'tMENIS

Date AUG 11 1993

Date:

.'

10. GENE~IZED SITE PROFILE

_.-~: ..' ... -

1 J 1) As~halt

2 J 2) Modern silty sand fill with

i inclusions of demolition debris.I

3 I 3) Lot destruecion layf:!r· -.of· .sandt;l with clay containing fragmentsI

I of brick, coal, and pebbles.

4 i 4) Late 19th - early 20th Centuryoccupation laver of silty sand.

5

6

7

- -

5) 1871-1875 Urban L~prov~~ent

fill layer of sil t~, sand andsandy clay. Sterile.

6) Mid-19th century yard surface.

7) Subsoil.

OUAORANGl( l0CA1ION

25.Location of the Project

Area, Square 530(USGS 1983)

.'

/ .:.

..II

IIII...II

~rl/•

..

II.. . ..0\ .

'0-,tv '~. 0

V .,;-&•••.N.

••

..: ~ D

N . VI ..~_-.. 67f/iPr ..

•.,. ... & • C w... : .. _ .. ~ • __ ._

II......

."~•

Z•.....

.t/1. ~

, 0

i ,.. . . .•~, ... . . ..... ..o •

e;

ST.,. ." .

00

ST.;.

~ . I

....

·!F: ..

20M

80FT

•..... It"':• ....••

..

.~

(f)

i:'.,~

: "? ..~.. I0'

o

oj

I.I

I

z•

..a·..II

• II II n

-.&.&··-:-,.·· ...• ... ·G. . -: II

II It· n·,,~ l':": .,I.~_&.&i(••• n,.;~•• :.H. I. It 0

T... • II

• :>:-::>"

Figure 1

APPENDIX B

SAMPLE MAPS/PROFILES

Science

G Street N.W.

- Trendles

50 Feet

Soarce: B.llte ."0Area. Ph••eD

Figure 1: Site Plan (Glumac, et al. 1995).

rrpre 1.2Locatio••rFlnt SisPIa.. I Tftftc:ha

IFeet

o swe we ~

-10'

-20'

IO'

,III

""'18' ­8ltctWIII

I •10' .

Bricb Slope Dow.ward.. 60Dea-s

Dees* Pi. (Baemenl)

I20'

ranon. Zn aeena Scleace

TCIC Unit I

Fahln:1QPaaible Chimney

Feahln:IBConcn:te

Slab

1----- --III,I, ,

II,,I,

SouchenI EldaIt or'Oripnal Tn:nch

L _,,, FcallllC IL Bridt Will, .gs Q :: 2<?~

Nollhem ExtentorOri.i",,1 Trench: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - I - O', I

:__ ~!~~n:~v~~~~ ~~_~~~rklW.1IEdaeo( AlleyI I

30'Soan:e: '.noa. En neenn Science, lac.Area. PIIue 0

Figure 2: Planview (Glumac, et ale 1995).

Trench 4

..........T-

4'-

@ H.nts M8trtx No.

UPhaMI

Wi¥"! Pha•• VII

1·······"·1 - VIII..:..;~~,.' 1.

_PhaMIX_PII...xDSublOll

0 ,.I I

I I'

0 30cm

43 lOVR 513_ nllOYR 516 r_h brown .ily day;._;Pt.-n.treneh3 .....n

.. 10YR 5Illl'8)'_ wIIh25% lOYR 2/1 bled<loo....h; ....

45 lOYR4I3 __;Il_

48 lOYR 511graylnlllhdwllh 25% lOYR 2/1 bl8d<loo...Ih; ......

47 BuIdtng R......-; poured c:cnaete

4. 2.!5Y411 llarllll'8)' InIr loam;~.

50 2.!5Y513l1ghl..... _ 1IIl1oem; pe!lIlIeI. coal , end brIc:It tregmenll

52 PIle.. ft. hnctl 3

J3 10YR 2/1 bled<_; hlgIl ora- oonIenl: Ieee-",-;_

34 SV 411llarll grer lily dey; _; IIrlcl flockS nI hgmonto

42 2.5VR 512graytIh_ ..-_ 25% 7.!5YR 414brown day loam;no.n.cIUN: "'~_;IIrlcl~

'~1... 2.!5YR 5H 19hI.... _ moatecIwIh15~7,5YR 414_ nl15%

10YR!lIll yeIcMIIIt_Illy dlIr, crumb.-;.....: B...,."..hndlR ~

48 ce.118Oabrlc:ltclhlldlngWIIIle_1oII Ifni 12. Slendetd oIn(2-l1r·3.5-lly·7-ln.lIItcU~ IOYR514relc>wll! _ ...... ani morteI

55 IIuIdet'e hndl lot -..... ~31 2.!5Y llr.l iW'l yeIIowIoh _.1Iy dey, no;-

31 aYR 411 llarll .,., Illy dlIr, no 1Iruct,n: ,+-':-.: pi! ..

!III PIlle..... ~37 !5Y 5Illl'8)' ....__ pebbIH ~

31 2.!5YR 512greriIh browndey _; ertlI_~co..: """'

41 7.!5YR !lIBIIrOng brownsencIy !oem;pebllle~ llIeri.

1 2.5Y 4/1 llarllll'WYlilly cll!Y; we'" pI.ly ....te: pe!lIlIeI : iron sIttnIng

Figure 27. Trench 4, southprofile.

Figure 3: Trench Profile (Seifert, et al. 1995)

Panons ED ineerin Science

Square 455

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20r;--:--- I

'-- -II 21

-r-- 2210

- -

9 8 7 6 S 4 3 2 I

Source: Tax Assessment, after F.ehtz &: Pratt, 1173

Source: Btiste, 1960

Area.'''.D fleuR 5.1Lol N••ben in Square 455

Pigure 4: Comparison of 1873 and 1960 Lot Assesments (Glumac, et al. 1995).

o'I

10'I

l!I'I

JO'I

4U 'I

' I • •.. '

FCIllft'''?.. ....t ", ,.."", ",,., ., , ,,"', ~~.~~.'11' N

·· · · · I · · · · · · · · · ··· · ·· · · ·=== · ·· ·· · ·· · · · ·· · ·· ·· ·~~~~£5:~~i55!~

"

o- --feet

10

key.!kI-.": Ion VI ......sc- 8: IbvJ brici: deaoIidoII .....s-. C: AipMII~ D: Ion !II p., INt Ion Y.Z p}'iltla.- *-'Y cc.alidIIrld

JriIlY IWMIll.. fII"-7 ilia III.....,..,...~ E: PII~ filion "',aIowIslt '--~ cby willi "let.

... adl<t ......... 1llllllk

SUIln:r: ,""nollS Enllnrrrh11 Selmer. II1C.

sa-f: lonJllli~"""I1!1)0"'"51.-0: lon~............,.1IItsa- H: lon"'~...,.. ~ser- t IOva YJ .....~__ 1lI1J1Uld~

"CNdI'"RD"'-''' kkt. n.b

Figure 5: Planview and Profile (Glumac, et al. 1995).

ST. JWo.. ,

G·

~ .I"

I' ,f IF ST~ N. W.

Sdence

~'er.H.

I

Source: Sanborn. 1928 Scale Itt = 60'"pre3.?Sq.are 455 ...'2.bued •• Sa.bora

Figure 6: 1928 Sanborn Map (Glumac, et ale 1995).

References for Sample Figures

Glumac, P., E. Crowell, B. Crane, C. Shields, J. Rutherford, and V. Robertson1995 Phase I and II Archaeological Investigation/or the Washington, DC Arena.

Report prepared for EDAW, Inc., Alexandria by Parsons Engineering Science.

Seifert, D., J. Balicki, E. O'Brien, D. Heck, G. McGowan, and A. Smith1998 Archaeological Data Recovery: Smithsonian Institution National Museum 0/the

American Indian Mall Site. Office of Physical Plant Project No. 902003.Prepared for the Smithsonian Institution and Venturi, Scott Brown andAssociates, Inc. by John Milner Associates, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia.

APPENDIX C

NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA BASE FORM

NADB - REPORTS RECORDING FORM

Complete i terns 5 through 14. Refer to the" Instructions for Completinq NADBReports Recording Forms.- .

1. DOCUMENT NO.

2. SOURCE AND SHPO - 10 _

3. FILED AT

4. UTM COORDINATES

Zone _Zone _Zone _Zone _Zone _Zone _

Continuation, see 14.

Easting _Easting _Easting _Easting _Easting _Easting _

Northing _Northing _Northing _Northing _Northing _Northing -_

S. AUTHORS _

6. YEAR _

Year pubLf shed;

7. TITLE

8. PUBL1CATION TYPE (circle one)1 Monograph or Book2 Chapter ina Book or Report Ser i es3 Journal Article4 Report Series5 Dissertation or Thesis6 Paper presented at a Meeting7 Unpublished or Limited Distribution Report8 Other

Paqe 2

9. INFORMATION ABOUT PUBLISHER/PUBLICATIONFollow the American Antiquity style guide pUblished in 1983, Vol. t8,pp. 438-441, for the type of publication circled.

10. STATE/COUNTY (Referenced by report. Enter as many states, counties,or towns, as necessary. Enter all, if appropriate. only enter Town ifthe resources considered are wi thin the town boundaries. )

STATE 1 _ COUNTY _ TOWN _

STATE "')... - COUNTY _ TOWN _

STATE 3_ COUNTY _ TOWN _

Continuation, see 14.

11. WORKTYPE (circle all that are appropriate)01 Cul tural Resource Management Plan31 Archeological Overview and Assessment32 Archeological Identification Study (Phase I)33 Archeological Evaluation Study (Phase II)34 Archeological Data Recovery (Phase III)3S Archeological Collections and Non-Field Studies999 Other Non-Archeological Studies

Purnish a keyword in keyword category 1 to identifynature of thi s non-archeoloqical study.

12. KEYWORDS and KEYWORD CATEGORIESo Types of Resources (or "no resources" )1 Generic Terms/Research Questions/Specialized Studies2 Archeological Taxonomic Names3 Defined Artifact TypeS/Material Classes4 Geographic Names or LocationsS Time6 Pro ject Name/Pro ject Area7 Other keywords

Paqe 3

Enter as many keywords (with the appropriate keyword cateqory number) asyou think will help a person (1) who is trying to understand what the reportcontains or (2) who is searching the database for specific information.Whenever appropriate, record the number of acres studied in a document.______......;8!!.!c=:JrUei,5sL- [ 4 ] [ ] [ ]--------[ ] [ ] [. ]--------[ ] [ ] [ ]--------[ ] [ ] [ ]--------[ ] [ ] [ ]--------[ ] [ ] [ ]--------[ ] [ ] [ ]--------[ ] [ ] ( ]

Continuation, see 14.

13. FEDERAL AGENCY CODE _

14. CONTINUATION/COMMENTS (include item nc . ) _

FORM COMPLETED BY

Name Date _

Address _

CityZip

____________ State _

Telephone Number _

Phase I Archaeological Identification Survey – Testing and Archival Research, Land Use History, and GIS Map Analysis By law, a Phase I archaeological survey is conducted by personnel meeting the minimum standards for archaeologists and/or cultural resources personnel as defined by the Secretary of the Interior (see link below). All work follows the District’s guidelines for conducting archaeology, the 1998 Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in the District of Columbia, (see link below) with work plans for each project submitted to the DC City Archaeologist in the Historic Preservation Office (HPO)/ DC SHPO for review and approval. Close coordination and consultation with the City Archaeologist are needed throughout all projects. In no case should any work proceed without consultation and submission of a work plan for review and approval by the DC HPO/SHPO. Archaeological investigations should commence as far ahead of construction as possible to allow the work to proceed safely, to provide time for review, and to permit a study’s conclusions to inform project plans. It speeds things up if the project team requests utility marking and permits (if needed) rather than leaving those steps to the archaeologist. Locations where a former cemetery was present or suspected of being present may still contain burials whose discovery would require notification of the Metropolitan Police Dept. and the Medical Examiner. The HPO will work with these agencies to avoid undue project delays. For certain schedule-critical projects, a fast-track process is available that compresses the phases – contact the City Archaeologist to determine if this option is appropriate. Additional phases of investigation may be warranted if potentially significant archaeological sites are identified during Phase I investigations. Phase II National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility testing focuses on intensive investigations designed to determine whether a site retains sufficient integrity and historical/prehistoric significance to meet NRHP eligibility requirements, and establish the physical boundaries of the eligible area. If a site is found to be significant or eligible for the NRHP and will be affected or impacted by the proposed project, then some sort of mitigation for the loss of the site is required. A Phase III data recovery excavation is one type of mitigation, but others are available. These decisions are made in consultation with the HPO. We encourage leaving significant resources in place by avoidance when possible. Phase II and III investigations are conducted much less frequently than Phase I studies. A Phase I archaeological study involves several steps, including: 1) Prepare a historic context and land use analysis of the project area using GIS technology if appropriate. This step is sometimes referred to as Phase IA study, a detailed analysis of whether resources are likely present in the project area. Geoarchaeological evaluation may be an appropriate technique for Phase IA on some projects. Geoarchaeologists are soil scientists or soil morphologists that specialize in the soils found in archaeological contexts and they help establish whether soils of archaeological interest are present within an area that

8/17/17

merit full-scale testing. If there is evidence of filling and/or grading, we recommending using GIS to prepare and cut-and-fill analysis, comparing historic topographic data to current. 2) Conduct archaeological testing to determine if potentially eligible archaeological resources are present. This step is sometimes referred to as Phase IB site identification survey and may entail manual excavation of shovel tests or mechanical excavation of trenches using equipment such as a backhoe or Gradall. 3) Conducting data analysis including artifact analysis, interpretation, and curation preparation of all artifacts, associated records, and digital data. Depending on the number and types of artifacts recovered, this could take hours, days, or weeks of analysis followed by report writing; and 4) Reporting project results by completing a draft and final technical report following the District’s Guidelines. The draft report is submitted to the DC HPO (and other agencies if necessary) for review and comment, and a revised, final report is completed and submitted along with the collections to the HPO (or other agency as appropriate) for permanent curation. A project is not finished until a final report and the collections and associated records are accepted for curation. The HPO will furnish checklists for submitting reports and collections during consultation. Links: The 1998 Guidelines and other relevant documents are available on the HPO web site: http://planning.dc.gov/page/archaeology-district-columbia When is archaeology needed?: https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/publication/attachments/Where_When_Archaeology.pdf Link to web tour “Washington Underground” : http://www.heritage.umd.edu/CHRSWeb/DC%20Archaeology/DC%20Archaeology%20Tour/Archaeology%20Tour.htm Secretary of Interior’s (SOI) Professional Qualification Standards: http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/arch_stnds_9.htm Lists of Consultants meeting the SOI Standards: District of Columbia: http://www.dcpreservation.org/contractors/ Maryland: http://mahdc.org/contractor-directory/ Virginia: http://www.dhr.virginia.gov/pdf_files/VDHR_HistoricTradesDir.pdf DC Office of Planning GIS standards: ESRI Shapefile (*.shp) format with a spatial reference for Washington, D.C. using the North American Datum (NAD) 1983 State Plane for Maryland FIPS 1900 in 1 meter units with a central meridian of -77, and latitude of origin at 37.6666 For more information please contact: Dr. Ruth Trocolli, DC SHPO Archaeologist 202-442-8836 or ruth.trocolli@dc.gov

 

 

                                                                                                                                                     rev.9/17 

I,          [consultant/other]                     with     [firm/agency]                                                       

am under contract to complete the tasks outlined in the DC HPO‐approved Work Plan for the proposed 

archaeological investigations at  [ location, SSL ], DC HPO project number xx‐xxxx_.  I further understand 

that completion of this project, in accordance with the approved Work Plan, requires adherence to the 

Guidelines  for  Archaeological  Investigations  in  the  District  of  Columbia  (available  at  the  link  below), 

applicable state and federal standards, as well as District standard operating procedures for submission 

of  all  documentation,  reports,  images,  field  notes  and  records,  electronic  data,  archaeological 

collections, and related records.  

A  collections database  template,  codebook,  collection  submission  checklist, and  report  checklist have 

been  provided  for  your  use.  Please  allow  sufficient  time  when  scheduling  a  collections  transmittal 

meeting  for reviewing condition and completeness of the submitted materials.  Inadequately prepared 

collections and documentation submissions will not be accepted until they meet the established criteria. 

In  addition,  reports  that  are  incomplete,  inadequately  researched,  and/or  have  conclusions  or 

recommendations  that do not  reflect  the  level of effort may be  returned  for  revisions before  formal 

review will start, and before concurrence will be issued.  

Please sign below and return to Ruth Trocolli, District Archaeologist upon receipt of DC HPO approval for 

the Work Plan.  Additionally, please contact the DC HPO with any questions. 

DC HPO Report # __  DC HPO Accession # __ 

Is this collection being curated by the DC HPO?   Yes     No    other (describe) ________________ DC HPO offers to curate the collection at no cost to the developer/owner but other arrangements are possible including it being loaned to the HPO – Please visit this issue with your clients and update form as necessary.   Signatures:   _______________________________  ________________________________        ________ Consultant or Other Responsible Party  Printed Name   Date      Are you a current member of RPA? Check box that applies:    Yes     No    RPA‐qualified    DC HPO _________________________________         Date ________    Ruth Trocolli, Ph.D., District Archaeologist              Historic Preservation Office   Office of Planning   202‐442‐8836 ruth.trocolli@dc.gov  http://planning.dc.gov/publication/dc‐archaeology‐guidelines                                                     

rev.01/2018

Survey Report Checklist Pg. 1

D.C. HPO Archaeological Compliance Survey Report Checklist Please use to ensure your report is complete and acceptable for review; submit with draft report.

Date Subject

SHPO/ HPO Coordination

____ Has the proposed project and survey work plan/ methodology been discussed with the City Archaeologist? Submission of a work plan for HPO review and approval is required before starting any field work.

____ Has an archaeological resources identification (aka project data request) of sites and surveys in and near the project area been requested from the City Archaeologist prior to preparing a work plan? Please allow sufficient time for DC HPO response.

____ Does the field survey meet the compliance needs for the proposed project? Are the methods adequate to identify resources given the depositional context and project LOD? Is the testing strategy adequate to reach deeply buried resources?

____ Have provisions been made for consultation should potentially eligible resources been identified?

____ Is any type of GIS work needed, such as a cut-and-fill analysis, historic map overlay, or elevation comparison? Has an acceptable base map been selected and the appropriate correction factors used?

____ Have a Report Number and Accession Number been requested from the DC HPO? This is required before final submission.

Technical Documentation ____ Has a site number been assigned and draft site form(s) submitted for review, if appropriate?

____ Is the lead federal agency or other responsible agency clearly identified, as well as the

appropriate legal mandate, e.g., Section 106, NEPA, DC Historic Preservation Act, etc.?

____ Are NRHP-eligibility criteria discussed and clearly applied to all identified and/or affected sites? Do the recommendations follow from the eligibility discussion?

____ Are soils, depositional context, presence/absence of fill and/or grading, and topographic changes adequately discussed?

____ If geoarchaeology has been conducted is report included as an appendix?

____ Are the GIS data processing methodologies and correction factors documented?

____ Are the figures clear with legend, north arrow, scale, in focus, and labeled, as appropriate?

___ Report elements required per the DC Guidelines (1998): Abstract or Management Summary Public Summary APE Map & map showing tested locations, e.g., test units, STPs, trenches, augurs, etc. NADB Form (National Archaeological Database)

rev.01/2018

Survey Report Checklist Pg. 2

Previous Investigations Historic Context & Land Use History Methodology Results & artifact analysis and interpretation Eligibility discussion & Recommendations References Cited Artifact Catalog Site form (if appropriate) Short Qualifications of Preparers (No more than one page per person.) Geoarchaeological Results (if appropriate.)

Collections/ Artifacts – See DC HPO guidance documents for specific instructions

____ Indicate the location/ facility where the project documents including field records, images,

research files, databases, GIS spatial data, and artifact collection will be curated in the abstract and body of the report. For District-owned property this will usually be with the DC HPO.

____ For all projects the DC HPO requires submission of a copy of all data generated, preferably in electronic format. This includes field records, images, research files, databases, GIS spatial data, and artifact collection database.

____ For collections coming to the DC HPO for curation, close coordination is required to meet guidelines regarding assigning object ID numbers, electronic database requirements, artifact marking/labeling, bagging, artifact bag tags, archival packaging, selective discards, and collection transmittal.

General QA/QC ____

Does the format follow the District’s 1998 guidelines for reports, e.g., SAA format, etc.?

Free of grammatical and factual errors? Are all the in-text citations included in the References Cited section? Are all cited/illustrated maps included in the References Cited section? Are needed figures and tables included in the body of the text? Are table sums correct, e.g., artifact counts, STP counts, etc.? Do table sums match the in-text sums? Is the report written with a focus on D.C.- area archaeology and history?

____ Submit draft reports in PDF format electronically to via your DC HPO Box.com FTP* and mail a

hard copy. Short management summary documents can also be submitted electronically. Consider using the line number feature for draft reports to facilitate the review process. * Please contact DC HPO Archaeology if a Box.com FTP has not been created for you. Or, please send documents to DC HPO via your own FTP.

____ Submit final, revised reports in both electronic and hard copy formats.

____ Hard copies should also be sent by the agency or CRM consultant to the additional repositories

indicated in the Guidelines. Other Considerations: 1. Urban Archaeology requires techniques and discovery methods that may be rarely used in other settings. Please consult the City Archaeologist to identify the potential for deeply buried sites in your project area, the need for geoarchaeological consultation, and whether the use of mechanical testing is appropriate. 2. Monitoring is not a method for site discovery. 3. The District does not have a “Letter Report” format. If you believe a technical memorandum or abbreviated report is adequate to document a project, please discuss with the City Archaeologist prior to submission. 4. The HPO may return reports that are incomplete, poorly written, lack actionable recommendations, and/or those submitted with lack of quality control for completion before they will be reviewed.

rev. 01/2018

Archaeological Collections Submission Checklist

Please read below and complete the requested items to ensure the collection is in condition for transfer to the DC HPO. Upon arrival, we will conduct a spot check to ensure requirements have been met, so please plan ahead. Incomplete preparation will delay the transfer. Unscheduled drop-off submissions are unacceptable. Please ask if you have questions. Documentation Checklist: NOTE: If appropriate, associated documents can be separated into one box. This box may contain any Documentary Research, Paper Field Records, Maps, Drawings, the Final Report, the Artifact Catalog (hard copy) and all images including Photographs, Negatives, Slides, Digital Images, Contact Sheets, Prints, etc. When submitting Electronic Collections Data, please refer to the Suggested requirements for consultants, following this checklist. Completed? # Copies Item Notes

2 Transfer of Ownership Forms

Hard copies. One copy for DC HPO and one for you, to be JOINTLY SIGNED upon arrival.

1

Box Inventory Sheet(s)

Hard Copy

2

Revised Final Report

Hard copies

(varies)

Box Inventory Sheet(s)

Hard copy. Each box should include a Box Inventory Sheet detailing the box contents (e.g. Project Information, Material Types, Proveniences, Associated Bag Numbers, etc.).

2

Artifact Catalog (spreadsheet or database)

Electronic copies: Original Catalog (PDF or complete word processing file*). Past Perfect Conversion Table* *Must be from a program that exports to a Past Perfect compatible file (e.g. Access, Excel, dbase, etc.) and uses compatible fields. NOTE: May be submitted to DC HPO via your Box.com FTP. Please contact DC HPO Archaeology if a Box.com FTP has not been created for you. Or, please send documents to DC HPO via your own FTP.

1

Revised Final Report

Electronic copy (PDF or complete word processing file). NOTE: May be submitted to DC HPO via your Box.com FTP. Please contact DC HPO Archaeology if a Box.com FTP has not been created for you. Or, please send documents to DC HPO via your own FTP.

1

Field Records: Maps, Drawings, and Images (if possible)

Provide a readable, good-quality scan to PDF. We will be archiving these data as part of the Digital Antiquity Initiative. NOTE: Folder of images may be submitted to DC HPO via your Box.com FTP. Please contact DC HPO Archaeology if a Box.com FTP has not been created for you. Or, please send documents to DC HPO via your own FTP.

GIS Spatial Data (if appropriate)

Specify projection and include metadata.

Collections Checklist: NOTE: Have you requested an Accession number from the DC HPO? Have you evaluated the Artifact Assemblage and discussed with City Archaeologist for any potential for selective discard of specific artifacts? We suggest doing so before artifact processing is complete. Completed? Item Notes Have you requested an Accession number for the collection? ALL packaging Archival? (Folders, Boxes, Bags, Tags, etc.) ALL (appropriate) artifacts labeled with catalog numbers? ALL artifact bags have acid-free/archival tags inserted? ALL artifact bags labeled?

Date of Last Revision: 12/2016

Deed of Transfer/Gift:  [Archaeological Collection] 

 This  contract  transfers  possession  of  the  archaeological  collection  described  below  from  the  current location or owner, be it an individual or an institution, to the DC Historic Preservation Office (HPO), an agency of the government of the District of Columbia, without stipulations or conditions placed on the transfer/gift. This is legally binding and is a complete deed of transfer/gift made from [name, title, firm/ affiliation] to the HPO on [date].    The  recipient  guarantees  continued  care  and  curation  of  the  said objects.    An  inventory  is  attached  that  summarizes  the  collection  and  is  the  transfer/gift  under discussion.  Project Information:     DC HPO Project  [#]  DC HPO Report [#]  DC HPO Accession [#]  Project Name___________________________________________________________________   Federal or District Agency__________________________________________________________  Type of Project/ Archaeological Survey Phase(s):  _______________________________________  Site Name(s) _________________________________________ Site Number(s): _______________   List of Transferred Items:  # of Standard Archival Boxes:____   # of Other Boxes or Containers [describe]: ____________  Hard copy Report: ____   Electronic copy Report:  [format]: ______   Hard copy Artifact Catalog: ___    Electronic Artifact Catalog/ Inventory: [format]___________  Is a box inventory sheet included in each box that details contents? ___  Check the following that apply: Artifacts: _____ Photographs______ Digital Image files [format] ______   Slides_____  Field Notes_______ Field Drawings & Maps______ Site Forms_______   GIS/ Spatial data files: [format]  ____________ Geoarchaeological data: [format]  _______________   Other: [describe] ________________  Please attach summary box inventory to this form.______ 

Signatures:  Agent/  Donor___________________________ Printed Name __________________________   Date ________  [Specify] Other___________________________ Printed Name __________________________   Date ________   Recipient________________________ Printed Name __________________________   Date ________                 Ruth Trocolli, Ph.D., City Archaeologist         202‐442‐8836 ruth.trocolli@dc.gov   

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER Government of the District of Columbia

401 E Street, SW

Washington, D.C. 20024

Recovery of Human Bone

at an Excavation Site

The following steps should be taken when bone that cannot be immediately recognized as non-

human (animal) is discovered.

I. Immediately stop digging at the discovery site.

II. Contact Metro Police Department (MPD) Command Information Center at 202-727-

9009.

III. Document the preliminary recovery information.

a. Who or what company discovered the bone.

b. The contact information of the individual who discovered the bone or the

appropriate supervisor.

c. The date and time the bone was discovered.

d. How the bone was discovered.

e. The location site of the bone including the approximate depth.

f. Any additional items found in the immediate vicinity

IV. MPD will respond to the scene and notify the Office of Chief Medical Examiner

(OCME)

V. OCME staff will respond to the scene, and will:

a. photograph the discovery site;

b. recover the bone if it appears to be out of context;

c. not recover the bone if it appears to be within the context of a historical grave.

VI. When the bone appears to be within the context of a historical grave, the remains will

be left in situ and City Archaeologist (202-442-8836) will be notified.

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER Government of the District of Columbia

401 E Street, SW

Washington, D.C. 20024

Recovery of Human Bone

at an Excavation Site

This form can be used to assist in the collection of information surrounding the discovery of a

potentially human bone.

Discovery was made by ______________________________________________________

Phone Number _____________________________________________________________

Discovery Date and Time ________________________

Discovery Location _________________________________________ Depth_________

Description of how the bone was discovered _________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

Descriptions of items found with or near the bone _____________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

CALL MPD Command Information Center, 202-727-9009, to

report the bone discovery.